New Delhi: A city court has refused to direct registration of First Information Report (FIR) against Delhi Art Gallery (DAG) on a plea alleging two paintings of late artist and Padma awardee MF Husain hurt religious sentiments.
Judicial Magistrate First Class Sahil Monga, while noting that the CCTV footage of the Delhi Art Gallery (DAG) and the said paintings have already been seized, said that no further investigation and collection of evidences is required on the part of the police at this stage.
Court earlier ordered seizure of paintings of Hindu deities
The court earlier ordered the seizure of the paintings of Hindu deities Ganesh and Hanuman displayed at the DAG on a plea filed by complainant and advocate Amita Sachdeva submitting that those paintings displayed at DSG were obscene. The court had on January 20, while citing the action taken report of police saying the investigating officer seized the security camera footage and the network video recorder of the art gallery, ordered the seizure of the paintings.
What did the court say on registration of FIR?
“In the present case, all the facts and circumstances of the case are within the knowledge of the complainant. CCTV footage of Delhi Art Gallery, NVR and the paintings in question have already been seized. In the considered opinion of this court, no further investigation and collection of evidences is required on the part of investigating agency at this stage, as all the evidences are in the possession of complainant as well as on record, and if the same is required at later stage, then section 225 BNSS can be resorted to,” the court said while dismissing the plea.
What did the complainant argue?
Sachdeva argued before the court that the most revered entities of Sanatan Dharma – Hanuman and Ganesh – were insulted in Husain’s paintings by depicting the deities in obscene manner.
“This is obscenity,” Sachdeva argued and added, “He (Husain) may be the greatest artist in the world, but he has no right to insult my deities,” Sachdeva argued.
Sachdeva further said that there was an advertisement and thousands of people saw these painting of “deities being ridiculed” and “Prima facie case is made out for exhibiting such offensive paintings for public viewing and hurting religious sentiments.”
What did DAG say in its statement?
Meanwhile, DAG, in a statement, has denied “any wrongdoing” and said that police in its investigation “did not report any cognisable offence committed by it”. It said that it had “complied with the due process and furnished all information as required by the police”.
DAG has further said that the drawings “were acquired internationally in an auction and brought to India following due customs clearance” and during the course of the exhibition no other person among about 5,000 visitors at the gallery raised any objection to any of the artworks displayed in this exhibition.
