The Allahabad high court has cautioned the management of a retail chain against compelling employees to wear Santa Claus red caps at workplace, observing that such compulsion may hurt the sentiments of people of different faiths and beliefs.
“This type of action is not permitted in the democratic system of the country wherein every citizen is free to follow his/her faith and belief,” the court said.
Court hears plea against criminal proceedings
Justice Saurabh Srivastava made the observation while partly allowing an application filed by one Vikram Singh alias Vishwa Vikram Singh who had challenged criminal proceedings initiated against him.
The applicant was facing an FIR under Sections 298 (uttering words, etc., with deliberate intent to wound the religious feelings of any person) and 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) of Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Also read: Religious conversion results in loss of Scheduled Caste status: Supreme Court
Employee allegedly made subordinates wear caps
As per the allegations, the applicant, working at the retail chain’s Agra store, compelled his subordinate employees to wear a Santa Claus cap.
{{/usCountry}}As per the allegations, the applicant, working at the retail chain’s Agra store, compelled his subordinate employees to wear a Santa Claus cap.
{{/usCountry}}The high court observed that the compulsion to wear the Santa Claus red cap was not permitted in the country’s democratic system wherein every citizen is free to follow their faith and belief.
The court warned the applicant and his superior authorities not to repeat this type of instruction. It added that such instructions could disturb the peaceful and harmonious atmosphere of the working place amongst their employees.
Counsel for the applicant submitted that Sections 298 and 504 IPC are non-cognizable offences.
Also read: Question of faith beyond judicial review: Govt to Supreme Court on Sabarimala
Lawyer cites procedure for non-cognizable offences
It was argued that in view of the explanation to section 2(d) CrPC, a police report filed after investigation into a non-cognizable offence is required to be treated as a complaint and cannot proceed as a police case.
Although the state opposed the application, the AGA did not dispute this legal submission. Referring to the explanation to section 2(d) CrPC, the court noted that the charge sheet submitted by the concerned investigating officer in the present case shall be treated as a complaint and shall be decided as such.
Also read: ‘Case by case’: Supreme Court on resolving faith and rights disputes
The high court set aside the December 2023 summoning order passed by the CJM, Agra, in so far as it concerned the applicant, and partly allowed the application.
However, the high court in its September 10 decision clarified that its order would not prevent the competent court from proceeding with the case by treating it as a complaint case, if required.