Comedian Munawar Faruqui granted bail by Supreme Court after spending over a month in jail

On Friday, the Supreme Court granted ad-interim bail to comedian Munawar Faruqui who was arrested by the Madhya Pradesh for allegedly offending religious sentiments. A division bench of the SC comprising Justices Rohinton Nariman and BR Gavai was hearing Faruqui's plea challenging the Madhya Pradesh High Court judgment denying him bail. The apex court took account of the argument of the comedian's counsel that the allegations in the FIR are vague

Moreover, it ruled that the procedure contained in Section 41 of the CrPC and the law laid down by its 2014 verdict in Arnesh Kumar v State of Bihar was not followed before arresting Faruqui. Staying the HC judgment, the SC issued notice in the matter. Meanwhile, it also stayed the production warrant of the Uttar Pradesh Police against him in another case. 

Read: Heritage Trees More Beneficial Than Construction Of Railway Over Bridges:SC Told

Read: Sonu Sood Gets Relief From SC In Property Case, Puts Out Strong Statement On Twitter

Comedian booked by MP Police

After attending a standup comedy show organised at Munro Cafe in Indore on January 1, 2021, local MLA Malini Gaur's son Eklavya Singh Gaur registered a complaint against Faruqui, Nalin Yadav- the organizer of the show and 4 other individuals. The complaint who describes himself as a custodian of the Hindu Protection Congregation (Sanghatan) claimed that the event was held without obtaining the necessary permission and without following the COVID-19 guidelines. Moreover, he alleged that the comedians including Faruqui were cracking "filthy and indecent" jokes on Hindu Gods and Goddesses and Union Home Minister Amit Shah. 

Subsequently, an FIR was registered under Sections 295A, 298, 265, 188/34 of the Indian Penal Code and the accused were arrested on the same day. On January 2, the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Indore rejected their bail pleas. During the bail plea hearing in the HC, Faruqui's counsel argued that every act of insult to religion without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings will not fall under the domain of Section 295A. On the other hand, the public prosecutor argued that the police had seized clippings purportedly showing jokes hurting the religious sentiments of Hindus. While dismissing the bail petition, Justice Rohit Arya stated that this was not a case of no evidence.

Read: Migration Of MBBS Student From Unrecognized College To Recognized One Impermissible: SC

In paragraph 12 of the verdict dated January 25, Justice Rohit Arya noted, "This Court has carefully perused the case diary. The statements of witnesses recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C., particularly; statements of the complainant Eklavya Singh Gaud and witness, Kunal. Empahsis laid on some portions of the statements by the learned Public Prosecutor have already been reproduced in the form of his contention. The evidence/material collected sofar, suggest that in an organized public show under the garb of standup comedy at a public place on commercial lines, prima facie; scurrilous, disparaging utterances, outraging religious feelings of a class of citizens of India with deliberate intendment, were made by the applicant."

Read: NCW Moves SC Against Bombay HC's 'skin To Skin' Verdict; Says 'it Has A Cascading Effect'