The Bombay High Court has dismissed a long-standing complaint against renowned singer Kailash Kher, who was accused of hurting religious sentiments with his song Babam Bam, dedicated to Lord Shiva. In a ruling issued on March 4, 2025, and made public on Thursday, a division bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Shyam Chandak found no “deliberate or malicious intent” on Kher’s part to outrage religious feelings. The ruling quashes a 2014 complaint filed by Narinder Makkar in a Ludhiana court, which alleged that the song’s video contained vulgar elements offensive to Lord Shiva’s devotees.
Court Finds No Malicious Intent in Song’s Content
The complaint stemmed from Kher’s 2007 song Babam Bam, which was part of the album Kailasa Jhoomo Re. Narinder Makkar, a self-identified Shiva devotee, claimed the song’s video depicted “scantily dressed women” and scenes of kissing, which he deemed vulgar and offensive to his religious sentiments. Makkar sought legal action under Indian Penal Code (IPC) sections 295A and 298, which address deliberate acts to outrage religious feelings.
However, the Bombay High Court ruled that the song’s lyrics were “nothing but praise of Lord Shiva and the attributes of his mighty character” and found no evidence to support Makkar’s claims. The court emphasized that to establish an offense under IPC Section 295A, there must be a clear, deliberate attempt to insult religious beliefs—something that was not present in this case. “Every action which may be to the dislike of a class of people may not necessarily lead to outraging religious sentiments,” the bench noted, underscoring the difference between personal dislike and intentional harm.
A Decade-Long Legal Battle Concludes
The legal saga for Kher began in 2014 when Makkar filed the complaint before the Ilaka Judicial Magistrate in Ludhiana, Punjab. Initially, bailable warrants were issued against Kher after he failed to appear in court, prompting the singer to approach the Bombay High Court for relief. In 2014, the High Court granted interim protection, ensuring no coercive action would be taken against Kher, a safeguard that remained in place until this month’s final ruling.
Kher, represented by advocate Ashok Sarogi, argued that he was only the singer of Babam Bam and had no involvement in the video’s choreography or direction, which was managed by Sony Music Entertainment. Sarogi also noted that the video had been cleared by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), supporting the claim that the content was not intended to offend. The court agreed, stating that Kher’s role was limited to singing the song.
Court Critiques Intolerance and Procedural Lapses
In its ruling, the court also addressed broader societal issues, quoting author A.G. Noorani to highlight the importance of tolerance in a free society. The bench observed, “Intolerance of dissent from the orthodoxy of the day has been the bane of Indian society for centuries.”
Additionally, the court pointed out procedural lapses in the case, noting that prosecution under IPC Section 295A requires prior sanction under Section 196(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which was not obtained. This procedural oversight further reinforced the decision to quash the complaint.