New Delhi [India], September 12 (ANI): The Delhi High Court has rejected the revision against the trial court order in a matter linked with the display of MF Hussain’s alleged objectionable paintings.
The Session court had upheld the order of the Magistrate’s court declining the order for registration of an FIR against the Art Gallery. The session court order was challenged before the High Court in revision, which was dismissed. The proceedings are pending before the trial court.
Justice Amit Mahajan dismissed the revision petition moved by Complainant advocate Amita Sachdeva after finding no infirmity in the order passed by the sessions court.
Justice Amit Mahajan said, “I find no infirmity in the impugned order dated 19.08.2025 passed by the learned ASJ, and the same cannot be faulted with.”
“The petitioner’s contention that the display of the alleged offensive paintings hurts the religious sentiments of millions of people in Sanatan community and therefore warrants mandatory registration of an FIR, is without merit,” Justice Mahajan held on September 10.
The High Court said that the learned Trial Court is already seized of the matter, and will duly examine whether the ingredients of the alleged offence are satisfied.
“If, during the course of the trial, the petitioner is able to substantiate her allegations, the law will take its course, and appropriate action will be taken against the accused persons,” Justice Mahajan said in the order.
On August 19, the Patiala House Court had upheld Magistrate’s order and rejected the revision petition seeking an FIR against an Art Gallery for displaying alleged objectionable paintings made by M F Hussain.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Saurav Pratap Singh Laller had rejected the revision filed by advocate Amita Sachdeva, who is also a complainant in this matter.
ASJ Saurav Pratap Singh Laller had said, ” The Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed. The proceedings before the learned JMFC shall continue as per law.”
“In conclusion, the Impugned Order reflects a reasoned application of mind, aligning with statutory provisions and judicial precedents. No police investigation is required at this stage, as evidence is accessible, and Section 225 BNSS provides an adequate mechanism for any future inquiry,” ASJ Laller held in the judgment of August 19.
The court had held, “While upholding the impugned order passed by the Learned Trial Court, draws strength from the observations made in the aforesaid judgment of the Hon’ble High Court on almost similar accusations.” (ANI)
Disclaimer: This story is auto-generated from a syndicated feed of ANI; only the image & headline may have been reworked by News Services Division of World News Network Inc Ltd and Palghar News and Pune News and World News
HINDI, MARATHI, GUJARATI, TAMIL, TELUGU, BENGALI, KANNADA, ORIYA, PUNJABI, URDU, MALAYALAM
For more details and packages
