Delhi Court Rejects Plea for FIR Against CM Over Hanuman Remarks Case

A Delhi court has dismissed a plea seeking an FIR against CM Rekha Gupta for her comments on Lord Hanuman, citing a lack of malicious intent to outrage religious feelings after reviewing the full context of her speech and police report.

Court Denies FIR Request Against Delhi Chief Minister

New Delhi [India], November 6 (ANI): A Delhi court on Friday refused to direct registration of an FIR against Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta over her remarks comparing Delhi government officials with Lord Hanuman, observing that the material placed before it did not prima facie disclose any deliberate and malicious intention to insult religion or religious beliefs. The court said the comparison made by Gupta during her speech appeared to be directed towards the government officials and their performance. It held that the essential ingredients of an offence under Section 299 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), relating to deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings, were not prima facie made out.

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Ashwani Panwar of Rouse Avenue Courts was dealing with an application moved by complainant Ram Niwas Sharma under Section 175(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), seeking registration of an FIR against Gupta. The complainant had alleged that Gupta, during an official government function at Kashmere Gate ISBT on September 23, 2025, made remarks mocking Lord Hanuman while addressing government officials and members of the public. According to the complaint, Gupta had compared Delhi government officials with Lord Hanuman and referred to the episode of Hanuman’s tail being set on fire, allegedly suggesting that officials remember their powers only when they come under pressure. The complainant alleged that the remarks had hurt the religious sentiments of Hindu devotees and amounted to an intentional insult to their religious faith. He had sought registration of an FIR under Section 299 of the BNS against the serving Chief Minister of Delhi.

Court Rationale and Police Findings

However, the court noted that the entire speech, along with its transcript and relevant certification, was already available on record. It observed that the identity of the speaker, the date and venue of the speech, and the words complained of were all ascertainable from the material already collected. Therefore, no further police investigation was required for collection of evidence. “The evidence which has allegedly hurt the religious feelings of the complainant is already on record,” the court observed, adding that the complainant had failed to identify any specific evidence beyond his reach which necessarily required police investigation.

The court further explained that while considering an application under Section 175(3) BNSS, the question is not merely whether a cognizable offence is alleged, but also whether police investigation is necessary for collecting evidence. It said the power to direct registration of an FIR and investigation should primarily be exercised in cases involving serious allegations where evidence is beyond the reach of the complainant or where custodial interrogation, recovery or discovery of facts is required.

Contextual Analysis of Remarks

The Action Taken Report filed by Delhi Police had also stated that the complete video of Gupta’s speech showed that she was appreciating the commitment and performance of Delhi government employees and comparing them positively with Lord Hanuman. Police had said that the remarks, when viewed in the context of the complete speech rather than in isolation, did not indicate that Gupta intended to ridicule Lord Hanuman or hurt the religious sentiments of devotees. The report also referred to portions of the speech in which Gupta allegedly expressed respect for Lord Hanuman and said that works were being accomplished with his blessings.

After considering the complaint, the police report and material on record, the court said it was not satisfied that a direction for investigation under Section 175(3) BNSS was warranted. Accordingly, the application seeking registration of an FIR was dismissed. However, the court clarified that the complainant would be at liberty to lead evidence in accordance with Section 223 of the BNSS. The issue of taking cognisance and issuance of process would be considered thereafter in accordance with law. (ANI)

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianetnews Editorial staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)