Calling someone 'miyan-tiyan' or 'Pakistani' in poor taste, but not offence: Supreme Court

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has ruled in its observation that referring to someone as "Miyan-Tiyan" or "Pakistani" may be in poor taste but does not constitute an offence of hurting religious sentiments.
A bench comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma made the remark while closing a case against a man accused of calling a government servant "Pakistani."
The FIR had been filed by an Urdu translator and acting RTI clerk at the sub-divisional office in Chas in Jharkhand.
February 11 court order said, "The appellant is accused of hurting the religious feelings of the informant by calling him 'miyan-tiyan' and 'Pakistani'. Undoubtedly, the statements made are poor taste. However, it does not amount to hurting the religious sentiments of the informant. Hence, we are of the opinion that the appellant shall also be discharged under Section 298 IPC."
Section 298 of the IPC pertains to words or gestures used with deliberate intent to wound religious sentiments.
The case involved Hari Nandan Singh, who had sought information under the RTI Act from the additional collector-cum-first appellate authority in Bokaro. Although the requested information was dispatched to him, he later appealed, allegedly after manipulating the documents sent via registered post and making false allegations of document tampering.
The appellate authority then instructed an Urdu translator to personally deliver the information to Singh. On November 18, 2020, the translator, accompanied by a messenger from the sub-divisional office in Chas, visited Singh’s residence to hand over the documents. Singh initially refused to accept them but later complied after the translator’s insistence.
It was alleged that Singh verbally abused the translator, referencing his faith, and used criminal force against him. This led the translator to file an FIR.
Following an investigation, the trial court framed charges against Singh under IPC Sections 298, 353 (assault or criminal force against a public servant), and 504 (intentional insult). The Jharkhand high court later rejected Singh’s plea to quash the proceedings.
"We set aside the order of the high court which has sustained the order of the trial court and consequently allow the application filed by the appellant and discharge the appellant from all the three offences alleged against him," it added.