Cognizance Under Section 504 IPC is Unsustainable Absent Evidence of Specific Intentional Insulting Words or Conduct

The informant (Opposite Party No. 2) alleged that after purchasing land on 05.08.2018, he visited the site where the petitioners and others demanded extortion money, assaulted him, and fired in the air.

A title suit was already pending between the parties regarding the property.

Following investigation, the police did not find evidence to substantiate charges under Section 307 (attempt to murder) or related grave provisions; instead, they submitted a chargesheet only under Section 504 of the IPC.

The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur, subsequently took cognizance and issued summons on 14.12.2018.

The petitioners moved the High Court to quash the order, contending the allegations did not meet the legal threshold for the charged offence.

1. Whether the allegations in the FIR and chargesheet satisfy the essential ingredients to constitute an offence of intentional insult under Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Whether the order of cognizance can be sustained when specific insulting words or conduct are absent from the record.

The court applied Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace.

The rule requires two essential elements: firstly, an intentional insult; and secondly, the insult must be of such a nature that the accused intended or knew it to be likely to provoke the victim to break the public peace or commit another offence.

The court clarified that "break the public peace" refers to the likely reaction of the person insulted, rather than an independent disturbance by the accused.

The Court observed that the FIR and chargesheet were entirely silent regarding any specific words spoken or specific acts done by the petitioners that could be categorized as an "intentional insult" under Section 504.

The court reasoned that the core of Section 504 is the act of insult itself, not the act of assault, threat, or demand for extortion.

While the informant alleged assault and firing, the police and the Magistrate had already effectively discarded those specific claims by dropping Sections 307 and related provisions.

Consequently, the court found that since the material on record was bereft of the specific insulting words or conduct necessary to satisfy the gravamen of Section 504, the legal requirements for the offence were not met.

The High Court allowed the application and quashed the order taking cognizance and issuing summons dated 14.12.2018 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur, in Ishakchak P.S. Case No. 160 of 2018.