New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday strongly rebuked courts for acting as “moral police,” overturning a 2019 Punjab and Haryana High Court order that imposed heavy penalties on musician Vishal Dadlani and activist Tehseen Poonawalla for their 2016 tweets mocking a Jain monk.
A bench of Justices AS Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan scrapped the fines, emphasizing that courts should not engage in moral policing. The High Court had earlier directed Dadlani and Poonawalla to pay ₹10 lakh each as costs, despite acknowledging that no criminal offence was made out in the case.
ALSO READ: NIA Conducts Raids in Haryana, UP in Connection with Goldy Brar-Linked Gurugram Grenade Attacks
Case Background
The controversy arose from tweets posted by Dadlani and Poonawalla criticizing Jain monk Tarun Sagar (now deceased), who had delivered a speech in the Haryana Legislative Assembly in 2016. Dadlani questioned the monk’s appearance and the mixing of religion with governance, while Poonawalla raised concerns over societal hypocrisy regarding nudity.
Their remarks triggered public outrage, leading to an FIR under charges of promoting religious enmity and hurting religious sentiments. Dadlani later apologized and met the monk, who forgave both, stating they were unaware of Jain traditions. However, a third-party complaint kept the legal battle alive.
High Court’s Controversial Order
In 2019, the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed the criminal case but imposed costs, stating that the fines would deter others from mocking religious figures for social media attention.
Supreme Court’s Strong Stance
The apex court criticized the High Court’s approach, stating, “No notice was served. What kind of order is this? Courts should not act as moral police—this is not their function.”
The bench ruled that once the High Court found no offence was committed, imposing costs was unjustified. “The High Court perhaps was influenced by the criticism of a religious figure, but that does not justify moral policing,” the Supreme Court observed before quashing the penalty.
The verdict reinforces judicial restraint, clarifying that courts must not overstep by enforcing moral standards beyond legal boundaries.
