A sessions court overturned a magistrate’s dismissal of a woman’s assault complaint, upholding her constitutional right to promote her religion
MUMBAI: Emphasising on constitutional freedom to promote one’s religion and religious thoughts, a sessions court has set aside a magistrate’s order dismissing a 64-year-old woman’s complaint that she was assaulted by a mob while sharing Biblical messages with a group in a Mumbai suburb.
The sessions judge held that the lower court wrongly relied on a police inquiry report without allowing Eunice Joseph to lead evidence or examine witnesses. The judge said the Constitution allows every person the “freedom to promote his religion and religious thoughts.”In this case, the crime was registered against the applicant and a friend based on allegations by the respondents, the sessions court said. But despite Eunice alleging a mob attack and a subsequent medical examination carried out on her and her friend, a counter FIR was not registered by the police…”magistrate
has also not considered this fact and directly believed the report of police who has refused to register the crime and acted partially,” additional sessions judge Mujibodeen S Shaikh said.
The incident took place on April 9, 2011, when Eunice Joseph and a friend were visiting residents in Tembipada in Bhandup to discuss the Bible. While Joseph and her friend were waiting for others, they were allegedly approached by a stranger, Savubai Kahiravkar, who questioned their presence and purpose of their visit.
The interaction escalated abruptly into an argument with Savubai. Joining in, another person named Pramod threw a religious picture to the floor and demanded to know if he was expected to destroy his own Gods to worship those of another faith. Savubai and Pramod allegedly incited a mob of approximately 20 people to beat up Joseph and her companions.Though Joseph sought medical treatment and approached Bhandup police, the authorities refused to register her complaint and instead filed an FIR against her for trespass and hurting religious sentiments based on a counter-complaint by the respondents.Eunice Joseph moved the sessions court in May 2024 against the magistrate’s order. The court found the magistrate’s reliance on a police report to be legally flawed since the department had already refused to register her initial complaint.The judge concluded, “the impugned order passed by the Magistrate is not legal and proper and it is necessary to remit back to the trial court for considering the matter afresh after recording the evidence of complainant and her witnesses.” Proceedings against Sarita Choube, Rakesh Choube, Savubai Khairavkar, and Pramod are now to be reinstated before the magistrate’s court.
