FIR Against Shekhar Suman, Bharti Singh Dismissed By Court - All About 'Ya Allah Rasgulla' Comment That Got Duo In Trouble

In

a significant legal development, the Bombay High Court has quashed a 2010 FIR against Shekhar Suman and Bharti Singh over alleged remarks made during a comedy show. The case, which stemmed from an episode of Comedy Circus Ka Jadoo, had accused the duo of hurting religious sentiments through a joke that referenced a Quranic phrase. After years of legal proceedings, the court ruled that no offence was made out, offering relief to both Suman and Singh while clarising the legal standards required in such cases.

Bharti Singh, Shekhar Suman's Ya Allah Rasgulla Controversy

The case dates back to November 2010, when an episode of Comedy Circus Ka Jadoo aired on television. A complaint was filed by a representative of the Raza Academy, alleging that a joke performed on the show insulted a Quranic verse and hurt religious sentiments. Based on the complaint, an FIR was registered at Pydhonie Police Station under Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with deliberate acts intended to outrage religious feelings, along with Section 34 for common intention. The complaint named several parties, including Sony Entertainment Channel, Shekhar Suman, Bharti Singh and a scriptwriter associated with the show.The controversy centred around a comedic segment in which Bharti Singh allegedly made a remark referencing a Quranic phrase, which was then repeated by Shekhar Suman, who was serving as a judge on the show.The complainant argued that the act was offensive to Islam and disrespected a sacred expression. The issue gained attention at the time, with representatives of the Raza Academy even approaching then Maharashtra Home Minister R R Patil. Authorities reviewed the recorded clip of the episode, and the matter eventually led to legal proceedings against those involved.

Bombay High Court quashes FIR against Bharti Singh, Shekhar Suman

Justice Amit Borkar of the Bombay High Court allowed the petitions filed by Suman and Singh seeking to quash the FIR. The court emphasised that the show in question was meant to be light entertainment and should be viewed in that context. “A comedy show is not judged by the same standards as a doctrinal speech or a political statement. A performance of this nature is to be read as a whole, and not by selecting stray expressions,” the court observed.The bench highlighted that for an offence under Section 295-A to be established, there must be both deliberate and malicious intent to outrage religious feelings. In this case, the court found no such intent. The court further clarified that merely feeling offended does not automatically constitute a criminal offence. It stated that unless there is clear evidence of malicious intent, criminal law cannot be invoked. “Offence felt by a section of viewers is not enough in law unless the mental element is also disclosed,” the court noted.

The court also took into account the specific roles played by the accused individuals. It noted that Shekhar Suman was present as a judge on the show and was not directly responsible for scripting the act. Bharti Singh, on the other hand, was performing a scripted routine. There was no material to suggest that either of them intended to insult any religion or acted with a shared objective to do so.Another key factor in the court’s decision was the absence of prior sanction under Section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which is mandatory for prosecuting offences under Section 295-A. Rejecting the State’s argument that the case should proceed to trial, the court stated that a trial cannot substitute the absence of a valid legal foundation. It observed that continuing the proceedings would amount to misuse of the legal process.