JUDGMENT Amar Saran, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the papers.
2. The allegation against the applicant were that on 26.1.2005 he was putting up a banner in front of a statue of Ambedkar on which slogans were written like 'Baba Saheb Amedkar Amar Rahen', 'Ambedkar Pradesh Zindabad', 'Pak Rashtrapati Mohd. Ali Jinnah Amar Rahen'. 'Desh Ka Loktantra Murdabad'. The banner was issued in the name of another person, Amit Kumar Jatav, styled as 'purva-pratyashi,, Lok Sabha'. The applicant is also alleged to have shouted the aforesaid slogans and he had pamphlets which he was distributing and in this manner the integrity of the nation was said to have been prejudicially affected and the applicant was taken into custody. The applicant was also carrying green flag which had moon and stars on its right corner and in his other hand he had pamphlets stating that by not making Shere-Hind Jinnah Saheb the prime minister, the country was divided and Pakistan was given and manuwadis treated the dalits as slaves and some other slogans for making Ambedkar Pradesh and making it part of the Pakistan etc. were also recited.
3. It is contended that the allegations against the applicant of ranting appears to be an act of a frustrated man and it cannot be said that if a person raises a slogan that if Jinnah had been the prime minister of India at the time of Independence, then the partition of the country could have been averted. It is urged that this could not be definitely said that the applicant was interested in dissolution of the country. The offence under Section 153B IPC is only punishable upto 3 years.
4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the aforesaid allegations disclosed rantings and ravings of a wholly frustrated man against the system and if a person out of a wrong ideological understanding merely suggests that Jinnah should have been made the prime minister of India as that would have saved the country from being partitioned, this would only amount to echoing the suggestions of Mahatma Gandhi who had also tried to persuade the then national leaders to accept Jinnah as their head in order to prevent the partition of the country and the aforesaid slogans, pamphlets and banners could certainly not be construed as spoken or written representation which is likely to cause disharmony or feelings of hatred towards the other community, or in any manner prejudicial to the integrity of the country. It is further urged that under Section 95 of the Penal Code, there is a specific exhortation not to take cognizance of acts which causes such harm which no man of ordinary sense and temper would complain of. It is further mentioned that for the said offence the applicant is in jail for a month and 20 days since 26.1.2005 and there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded at an early date.
5. In this view of the matter, without making any comment on the merits of the case, 1 direct that the applicant, Vijay Singh, , involved in case crime No. 16 of 2005, under Section 153B of IPC, PS Civil Lines, District Meerut, shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.