Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 73,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'catslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 73,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/unwitting-careless-039insults039-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc-amit-anand-choudhary-4681653/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/unwitting-careless-039insults039-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc-amit-anand-choudhary-4681653/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'catslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 74,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 74,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/unwitting-careless-039insults039-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc-amit-anand-choudhary-4681653/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/unwitting-careless-039insults039-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc-amit-anand-choudhary-4681653/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Code Context
            if (Configure::read('debug')) {

                trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);

            } else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6800019d00817-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6800019d00817-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6800019d00817-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 33559,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Unwitting, careless &amp;#039;insults&amp;#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;NEW DELHI: &lt;/em&gt;In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years&#039; jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&amp;quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &amp;quot;Lord Vishnu&amp;quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The SC&#039;s interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &amp;quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&amp;quot; the bench said.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&amp;quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please &lt;a href=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 22 April, 2017, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;unwitting-careless-039insults039-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc-amit-anand-choudhary-4681653&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4681653,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 33559,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Unwitting, careless &amp;#039;insults&amp;#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Freedom of Information,Freedom of Press,Freedom of Speech,Supreme Court&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Times of India

NEW DELHI: In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;NEW DELHI: &lt;/em&gt;In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years&#039; jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&amp;quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &amp;quot;Lord Vishnu&amp;quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The SC&#039;s interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &amp;quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&amp;quot; the bench said.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&amp;quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Please &lt;a href=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot; title=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 33559,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Unwitting, careless &amp;#039;insults&amp;#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;NEW DELHI: &lt;/em&gt;In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years&#039; jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&amp;quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &amp;quot;Lord Vishnu&amp;quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The SC&#039;s interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &amp;quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&amp;quot; the bench said.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&amp;quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please &lt;a href=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 22 April, 2017, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;unwitting-careless-039insults039-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc-amit-anand-choudhary-4681653&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4681653,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 33559
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Unwitting, careless &amp;#039;insults&amp;#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Freedom of Information,Freedom of Press,Freedom of Speech,Supreme Court&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Times of India

NEW DELHI: In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;NEW DELHI: &lt;/em&gt;In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years&#039; jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&amp;quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &amp;quot;Lord Vishnu&amp;quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The SC&#039;s interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &amp;quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&amp;quot; the bench said.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&amp;quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Please &lt;a href=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot; title=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/unwitting-careless-039insults039-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc-amit-anand-choudhary-4681653.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Unwitting, careless &#039;insults&#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Times of India

NEW DELHI: In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &quot;insults&quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Unwitting, careless &#039;insults&#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-The Times of India<br /><br /><em>NEW DELHI: </em>In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &quot;insults&quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.<br /><br />Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years' jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.<br /><br />&quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.<br /><br />The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &quot;Lord Vishnu&quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.<br /><br />The SC's interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&quot;.<br /><br />Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.<br /><br />&quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&quot; the bench said.<br /><br />&quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.<br /><br />Please <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms" title="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms">click here</a> to read more. <br /></div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$maxBufferLength = (int) 8192
$file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php'
$line = (int) 853
$message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Code Context
            $response->getStatusCode(),

            ($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')

        ));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6800019d00817-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6800019d00817-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6800019d00817-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 33559,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Unwitting, careless &amp;#039;insults&amp;#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;NEW DELHI: &lt;/em&gt;In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years&#039; jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&amp;quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &amp;quot;Lord Vishnu&amp;quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The SC&#039;s interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &amp;quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&amp;quot; the bench said.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&amp;quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please &lt;a href=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 22 April, 2017, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;unwitting-careless-039insults039-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc-amit-anand-choudhary-4681653&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4681653,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 33559,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Unwitting, careless &amp;#039;insults&amp;#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Freedom of Information,Freedom of Press,Freedom of Speech,Supreme Court&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Times of India

NEW DELHI: In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;NEW DELHI: &lt;/em&gt;In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years&#039; jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&amp;quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &amp;quot;Lord Vishnu&amp;quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The SC&#039;s interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &amp;quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&amp;quot; the bench said.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&amp;quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Please &lt;a href=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot; title=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 33559,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Unwitting, careless &amp;#039;insults&amp;#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;NEW DELHI: &lt;/em&gt;In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years&#039; jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&amp;quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &amp;quot;Lord Vishnu&amp;quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The SC&#039;s interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &amp;quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&amp;quot; the bench said.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&amp;quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please &lt;a href=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 22 April, 2017, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;unwitting-careless-039insults039-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc-amit-anand-choudhary-4681653&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4681653,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 33559
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Unwitting, careless &amp;#039;insults&amp;#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Freedom of Information,Freedom of Press,Freedom of Speech,Supreme Court&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Times of India

NEW DELHI: In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;NEW DELHI: &lt;/em&gt;In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years&#039; jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&amp;quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &amp;quot;Lord Vishnu&amp;quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The SC&#039;s interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &amp;quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&amp;quot; the bench said.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&amp;quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Please &lt;a href=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot; title=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/unwitting-careless-039insults039-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc-amit-anand-choudhary-4681653.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Unwitting, careless &#039;insults&#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Times of India

NEW DELHI: In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &quot;insults&quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Unwitting, careless &#039;insults&#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-The Times of India<br /><br /><em>NEW DELHI: </em>In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &quot;insults&quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.<br /><br />Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years' jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.<br /><br />&quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.<br /><br />The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &quot;Lord Vishnu&quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.<br /><br />The SC's interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&quot;.<br /><br />Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.<br /><br />&quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&quot; the bench said.<br /><br />&quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.<br /><br />Please <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms" title="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms">click here</a> to read more. <br /></div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$reasonPhrase = 'OK'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
Code Context
                    $value

                ), $first);

                $first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6800019d00817-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6800019d00817-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6800019d00817-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6800019d00817-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 33559,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Unwitting, careless &amp;#039;insults&amp;#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;NEW DELHI: &lt;/em&gt;In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years&#039; jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&amp;quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &amp;quot;Lord Vishnu&amp;quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The SC&#039;s interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &amp;quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&amp;quot; the bench said.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&amp;quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please &lt;a href=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 22 April, 2017, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;unwitting-careless-039insults039-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc-amit-anand-choudhary-4681653&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4681653,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 33559,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Unwitting, careless &amp;#039;insults&amp;#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Freedom of Information,Freedom of Press,Freedom of Speech,Supreme Court&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Times of India

NEW DELHI: In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;NEW DELHI: &lt;/em&gt;In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years&#039; jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&amp;quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &amp;quot;Lord Vishnu&amp;quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The SC&#039;s interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &amp;quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&amp;quot; the bench said.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&amp;quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Please &lt;a href=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot; title=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 33559,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Unwitting, careless &amp;#039;insults&amp;#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;NEW DELHI: &lt;/em&gt;In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years&#039; jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&amp;quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &amp;quot;Lord Vishnu&amp;quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The SC&#039;s interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &amp;quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&amp;quot; the bench said.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&amp;quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Please &lt;a href=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 22 April, 2017, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;unwitting-careless-039insults039-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc-amit-anand-choudhary-4681653&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4681653,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 33559
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Unwitting, careless &amp;#039;insults&amp;#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Freedom of Information,Freedom of Press,Freedom of Speech,Supreme Court&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Times of India

NEW DELHI: In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;-The Times of India&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;NEW DELHI: &lt;/em&gt;In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &amp;quot;insults&amp;quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years&#039; jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&amp;quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &amp;quot;Lord Vishnu&amp;quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The SC&#039;s interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &amp;quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&amp;quot;.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&amp;quot; the bench said.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&amp;quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&amp;quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Please &lt;a href=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot; title=&quot;http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms&quot;&gt;click here&lt;/a&gt; to read more. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/unwitting-careless-039insults039-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc-amit-anand-choudhary-4681653.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Unwitting, careless &#039;insults&#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Times of India

NEW DELHI: In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &quot;insults&quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Unwitting, careless &#039;insults&#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <div align="justify">-The Times of India<br /><br /><em>NEW DELHI: </em>In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &quot;insults&quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.<br /><br />Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years' jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.<br /><br />&quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.<br /><br />The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &quot;Lord Vishnu&quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.<br /><br />The SC's interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&quot;.<br /><br />Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.<br /><br />&quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&quot; the bench said.<br /><br />&quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.<br /><br />Please <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms" title="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms">click here</a> to read more. <br /></div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$cookies = []
$values = [
	(int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
]
$name = 'Content-Type'
$first = true
$value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

<head>

    <link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>

    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>

$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp'
$dataForView = [
	'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		'id' => (int) 33559,
		'title' => 'Unwitting, careless 'insults' to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary',
		'subheading' => '',
		'description' => '<div align="justify">
-The Times of India<br />
<br />
<em>NEW DELHI: </em>In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &quot;insults&quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.<br />
<br />
Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years' jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.<br />
<br />
&quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.<br />
<br />
The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &quot;Lord Vishnu&quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.<br />
<br />
The SC's interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&quot;.<br />
<br />
Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.<br />
<br />
&quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&quot; the bench said.<br />
<br />
&quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.<br />
<br />
Please <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms">click here</a> to read more. <br />
</div>',
		'credit_writer' => 'The Times of India, 22 April, 2017, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms',
		'article_img' => '',
		'article_img_thumb' => '',
		'status' => (int) 1,
		'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
		'lang' => 'EN',
		'category_id' => (int) 16,
		'tag_keyword' => '',
		'seo_url' => 'unwitting-careless-039insults039-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc-amit-anand-choudhary-4681653',
		'meta_title' => null,
		'meta_keywords' => null,
		'meta_description' => null,
		'noindex' => (int) 0,
		'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		'most_visit_section_id' => null,
		'article_big_img' => null,
		'liveid' => (int) 4681653,
		'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'edate' => '',
		'tags' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		'[new]' => false,
		'[accessible]' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[hasErrors]' => false,
		'[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[repository]' => 'Articles'
	
	},
	'articleid' => (int) 33559,
	'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Unwitting, careless &#039;insults&#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary',
	'metaKeywords' => 'Freedom of Information,Freedom of Press,Freedom of Speech,Supreme Court',
	'metaDesc' => '
-The Times of India

NEW DELHI: In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &quot;insults&quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to...',
	'disp' => '<div align="justify">-The Times of India<br /><br /><em>NEW DELHI: </em>In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &quot;insults&quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.<br /><br />Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years' jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.<br /><br />&quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.<br /><br />The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &quot;Lord Vishnu&quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.<br /><br />The SC's interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&quot;.<br /><br />Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.<br /><br />&quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&quot; the bench said.<br /><br />&quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.<br /><br />Please <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms" title="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms">click here</a> to read more. <br /></div>',
	'lang' => 'English',
	'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/',
	'site_title' => 'im4change',
	'adminprix' => 'admin'
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	'id' => (int) 33559,
	'title' => 'Unwitting, careless &#039;insults&#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary',
	'subheading' => '',
	'description' => '<div align="justify">
-The Times of India<br />
<br />
<em>NEW DELHI: </em>In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &quot;insults&quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.<br />
<br />
Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years' jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.<br />
<br />
&quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.<br />
<br />
The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &quot;Lord Vishnu&quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.<br />
<br />
The SC's interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&quot;.<br />
<br />
Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.<br />
<br />
&quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&quot; the bench said.<br />
<br />
&quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.<br />
<br />
Please <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms">click here</a> to read more. <br />
</div>',
	'credit_writer' => 'The Times of India, 22 April, 2017, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms',
	'article_img' => '',
	'article_img_thumb' => '',
	'status' => (int) 1,
	'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
	'lang' => 'EN',
	'category_id' => (int) 16,
	'tag_keyword' => '',
	'seo_url' => 'unwitting-careless-039insults039-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc-amit-anand-choudhary-4681653',
	'meta_title' => null,
	'meta_keywords' => null,
	'meta_description' => null,
	'noindex' => (int) 0,
	'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	'most_visit_section_id' => null,
	'article_big_img' => null,
	'liveid' => (int) 4681653,
	'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'edate' => '',
	'tags' => [
		(int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 3 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	'[new]' => false,
	'[accessible]' => [
		'*' => true,
		'id' => false
	],
	'[dirty]' => [],
	'[original]' => [],
	'[virtual]' => [],
	'[hasErrors]' => false,
	'[errors]' => [],
	'[invalid]' => [],
	'[repository]' => 'Articles'

}
$articleid = (int) 33559
$metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Unwitting, careless &#039;insults&#039; to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary'
$metaKeywords = 'Freedom of Information,Freedom of Press,Freedom of Speech,Supreme Court'
$metaDesc = '
-The Times of India

NEW DELHI: In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &quot;insults&quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to...'
$disp = '<div align="justify">-The Times of India<br /><br /><em>NEW DELHI: </em>In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless &quot;insults&quot; to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law.<br /><br />Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years' jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent.<br /><br />&quot;Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section,&quot; a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said.<br /><br />The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as &quot;Lord Vishnu&quot; on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands.<br /><br />The SC's interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by &quot;deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs&quot;.<br /><br />Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position.<br /><br />&quot;It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens,&quot; the bench said.<br /><br />&quot;The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty,&quot; the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court.<br /><br />Please <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms" title="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/unwitting-careless-insults-to-religion-must-not-be-prosecuted-sc/articleshow/58307229.cms">click here</a> to read more. <br /></div>'
$lang = 'English'
$SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/'
$site_title = 'im4change'
$adminprix = 'admin'

include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51

Unwitting, careless 'insults' to religion must not be prosecuted: SC -Amit Anand Choudhary

-The Times of India NEW DELHI: In a pronouncement that reiterates the constitutional protection to freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court has said that unwitting or careless "insults" to religion should not be prosecuted as this would amount to misuse of law. Concerned by the misuse of Section 295A of IPC, which provides up to three years' jail term for hurting religious sentiments, the Supreme Court limited the applicability of the penal provision to deliberate and malicious acts rather than casual observations that are not driven by malicious intent. "Insults to religion offered unwittingly or carelessly or without any deliberate or malicious intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class do not come within the section," a bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said. The bench passed the order on a plea by cricketer M S Dhoni challenging criminal proceedings against him for hurting religious sentiments for being portrayed as "Lord Vishnu" on the cover of a business magazine in 2013 holding several things, including a shoe, in his hands. The SC's interpretation should protect individuals and public figures that have often been at the receiving end of cases filed by political activists, cause chasers and overzealous or vengeful administrative authorities. While the SC decision to strike down in entirety Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for being violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression provided relief to social media users, the SC has reiterated the limits of Section 295A. The section says that an offence will be made out by "deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs". Despite a 1957 judgment of the SC that Section 295A could not be slapped on a person for unintentionally hurting religious sentiments, the rampant misuse of the penal provision persuaded the bench to clarify yet again the width and ambit of the legal position. "It is clear as crystal that Section 295A does not stipulate everything to be penalised and any and every act would tantamount to insult or attempt to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of class of citizens. It penalises only those acts of insults or those varieties of attempts to insult the religion or religious belief of a class of citizens which are perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class of citizens," the bench said. "The Constitution bench has further clarified that the said provision only punishes the aggravated form of insult to religion when it is perpetrated with the deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of that class. Emphasis has been laid on the calculated tendency of the said aggravated form of insult and also to disrupt the public order to invite the penalty," the court said while referring to the 1957 Constitution bench verdict of the apex court. Please click here to read more.