Court junks plea seeking FIR against Delhi exhibitor over MF Husain artworks

A Delhi court ruled no communal unrest arose from MF Husain's artworks at DAG, denying a police probe into alleged obscenity and religious offense.

No communal unrest or public incitement was caused by the display of two artworks by MF Husain at an exhibition last year at DAG, formerly known as the Delhi Art Gallery, a Delhi court said on Tuesday while refusing to direct a police probe against the exhibitors.

MF Husain (HT Archive)

Additional sessions judge Saurabh Partap Laler of Patiala House Courts issued the order in response to a revision petition by an advocate. The advocate had challenged a magistrate’s order from December last year, which had refused to register an FIR against DAG’s director and owners. The advocate claimed DAG displayed allegedly obscene paintings by Husain that offended Hindu religious sentiments. The detailed order was released on Thursday.

Observing that the matter lacked grave allegations, the court said, “The allegations, while sensitive, pertain to artworks in a private gallery, not public incitement or violence. No communal unrest is reported, and the seized evidence suffices for adjudication.”

The court noted that the petitioner faces no prejudice asshe can lead evidence in the complaint case, already ongoing before a magistrate at Patiala House Courts. Leading evidence refers to the complainant presenting evidence before the court through witness testimony and affidavits to support its argument.

The petitioner, advocate Amita Sachdeva, filed a complaint in December last year, after attending the exhibition titled “Husain: The Timeless Modernist” at DAG. She alleged that two of the paintings — one depicting Ganesha with a naked female figure on his lap, and another showing Hanuman holding a naked female figure — outraged the religious sentiments of Hindus.

Following the complaint, the Delhi Police, acting on the court’s directions,seized the paintings on January 22and stored them in the evidence room. Sachdeva also sought the preservation of CCTV footage from the exhibition held on December 4, 6 and 10, alleging that DAG tampered with evidence by removing the paintings shortly after she raised objections.

DAG, meanwhile, denied any wrongdoing, emphasising its commitment to artistic freedom. It said that the paintings were acquired through legitimate channels and cleared customs upon entry to India.

In January, judicial magistrate Sahil Monga ruled that the complainant, who claimed that the artworks offended her religious sensibilities, must substantiate her allegations rather than initiate a criminal investigation.

The magistrate went on to order the case to proceed as a complaint case, entailing examination of the complainant as well as proposed accused, and the scrutiny of evidence before the court rules.

Sachdeva, through advocate Makrand Adkar, contended the order, arguing that the offences necessitate a police investigation, including forensic investigation of the seized evidence, verification of the paintings’ authenticity and an inquiry into potential financial fraud or tampering, which the complainant cannot undertake by herself.

DAG was represented by senior advocate Madhav Khurana and advocates Shivam Batra and Rony O John.

The court said, “The primary grounds for challenge — that police investigation is essential — does not withstand scrutiny. The discretion under Section 175(3) BNSS (powers of a magistrate to order investigation) must be exercised judiciously, with application of mind, and not mechanically.”

Noting that Sachdeva already has access to all the key evidence, including photographs, CCTV footage and the seized paintings themselves through which she can summon witnesses to show deliberate malice and outrage to religious feelings, the court said, “The ATR (action-taken report) by the police confirms that the exhibition was acknowledged, but no malicious intent was discerned in the preliminary inquiry.”

The judge dismissed the allegations of fraud or tampering, saying that they are unsubstantiated and appear speculative.

The court said that in case police assistance is required, the magistrate who is presiding over the complaint case, holds the power to order a limited police inquiry to ascertain the truth, during the course of the matter.

“The impugned order (by the magistrate) 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,” the order said.

MF Husain remains a polarising figure in Indian art. His works have sparked numerous controversies, particularly for their depiction of Hindu deities in unconventional forms. Husain, who was conferred with the Padma Shri, Padma Bhushan and Padma Vibhushan, died in London in 2011.

Regarding the seizure of the paintings, a senior police officer in Delhi said, “We have not received any written or formal communication from the court yet. We will do as they say...when they say. As of now, nothing is being returned.”