This Is What People Are Saying about 295A, the Law Responsible for Kiku Sharda’a Arrest

Comedian Kiku Sharda's arrest for "mimicking" Baba Ram Rahim has upset many people. But the real culprit might just be Section 295A of the IPC.

By Vandita Kapoor

January 14, 2016

Yesterday’s arrest of comedian Kiku Sharda was bound to cause an mini-storm. Held for “mimicking” Baba Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh Insan, Sharda was sent to 14-days judicial custody for hurting the sentiments of the popular godman’s followers. Sharda has since apologised, saying that he was just following a script, and Ram Rahim has “accepted” his apology.

Doston the act on TV was not to hurt anyone’s feelings. My apologies to @Gurmeetramrahim ji and his followers. Let’s spread happiness. ?
— kiku sharda (@kikusharda) December 28, 2015

I was busy shooting OnlineGurukul; just got to know, devotees are hurt due to Kiku’s action.If he has apologized, no complaint from my side

— GURMEET RAM RAHIM (@Gurmeetramrahim) January 13, 2016

More than outrage over either Sharda or Ram Rahim, however, what has attracted the most indignation is the archaic law under which the comedian was booked — Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code.

kiku sharda

Source: Indian Kanoon

Previous targets of the law include actors Salman Khan, Shah Rukh Khan, Aamir Khan, Sunny Deol, Akshay Kumar, and comedy collective All India Bakchod.

People have taken to social media websites such as Facebook and Twitter to speak out against 295A, with a common criticism being that it inhibits creative freedom.

Section 295A for the longest time has been used to threaten artists. Even cops sometimes cant help but arrest because of the pressure.
— Tanmay Bhat (@thetanmay) January 13, 2016

Section 295A needs to go. Or modified. Or something. It gives every religious group ammo to go after anyone.

— Tanmay Bhat (@thetanmay) January 13, 2016

Prison nights with Kapil… I don’t see why we shouldn’t change the title with immediate effect #Sec295A
— Ashwin Mushran (@ashwinmushran) January 13, 2016

Indian Law da. #WeStandWithKikuSharda

— Sagarcasm (@sagarcasm) January 13, 2016

I fail to understand how mimickry by Kiku Sharda violated secion 295A of IPC which reads:

” 295A. Deliberate and…

Posted by Markandey Katju on Wednesday, 13 January 2016

Section 295A was first introduced to India by the British in the 1920s. Maybe it’s time to get rid of this particular piece of colonial legacy?

Like this story? Or have something to share? Write to us: [email protected], or connect with us on Facebook and Twitter (@thebetterindia).

Similar Story

India’s First Vertical Sea Bridge: 8 Things To Know About the New Pamban Bridge

As India’s first vertical lift railway sea bridge, the new Pamban Bridge, is set to reach completion by March next year, here’s some facts you should know about this technological marvel, which connect Rameswaram to mainland India.

If you found our stories insightful, informative, or even just enjoyable, we invite you to consider making a voluntary payment to support the work we do at The Better India. Your contribution helps us continue producing quality content that educates, inspires, and drives positive change.

Choose one of the payment options below for your contribution-

₹201 ₹501 ₹1001

By paying for the stories you value, you directly contribute to sustaining our efforts focused on making a difference in the world. Together, let's ensure that impactful stories continue to be told and shared, enriching lives and communities alike.

Thank you for your support. Here are some frequently asked questions you might find helpful to know why you are contributing?