Patiala House Court refuses FIR in MF Hussain painting dispute, magistrate's decision upheld:

News Topical, Digital Desk : Patiala House Sessions Court has refused to order a police investigation into a controversial complaint lodged over two paintings of famous painter M.F. Hussain. The complaint alleged that these paintings hurt the sentiments of Hinduism. Additional Sessions Court Judge Pratap Singh Laler said that there was no mistake in the decision given by the Magistrate Court on January 22. The Magistrate had decided that the matter should be pursued as a complaint case.

The court also clarified that the complainant, Advocate Amita Sachdeva, has evidence to prove her allegations through her own paintings and witnesses.

This is how the controversy started

According to the complaint filed in the court, on 4 December 2024, Amita Sachdeva went to an art gallery in Delhi. There she saw two paintings by M.F. Hussain, which she described as objectionable and hurting Hindu sentiments.

After this, she lodged a complaint with the police. But when she returned to the gallery with the investigating officer on December 10, the paintings had been removed. After this, she filed a petition in the court demanding to keep the paintings safe as evidence and register an FIR.

Delhi Police presented its report in the court. It said that these paintings were part of a private exhibition and their purpose was only to display the original works of the artist.

The paintings were confiscated on the court's order, but the police said that no evidence was found that could prove a cognizable offence. Therefore, no FIR was registered. The magistrate also refused to register an FIR after seeing the police report.

No need for additional police investigation- Court

The sessions court said that Section 299 of the BNSS is applicable only if it is proved that someone has intentionally and maliciously hurt religious sentiments. The court also said that the complainant has photographs and personal observations of the paintings.

Gallery staff or experts may be called as witnesses. The paintings and CCTV footage have already been seized. So there is no need for any forensic investigation or additional police investigation at this stage.

Magistrate can take further decision

The court clarified that if further need arises, the magistrate can order a police investigation under section 225 of the BNSS. For now, the matter will proceed as a complaint case.