Nagpur: The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court recently quashed an FIR against a woman accused of insulting the dead, ruling that her refusal to accept her mother’s body pending an inquiry does not attract criminal liability under Section 301 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke, while allowing the criminal application filed by the Amravati woman, Vijaya Ukarde through counsel Shilpa Giratkar, held that the prosecution failed to establish even a prima facie case under the provision invoked. The FIR, registered at Gadge Nagar police station in Amravati, alleged that the petitioner had humiliated her mother’s body by refusing to take its custody after death.The woman’s mother was found on October 13, 2025, at her residence in Amravati’s Bhowate Layout. Police informed the petitioner and asked her to take possession of the body. However, she declined to accept the body until an inquiry was conducted into the circumstances of her mother’s death, prompting registration of the offence.Giratkar argued that Section 301 of BNS applies only when there is a clear intention to wound religious feelings, insult religion, or cause indignity to a human corpse in a manner that affects public sentiments. She contended that mere refusal to take custody of a body, particularly while seeking clarification on the cause of death, could not be construed as a criminal act.The state, represented by KR Lule maintained that the petitioner’s conduct amounted to humiliation of the corpse and justified prosecution.Examining the FIR and material on record, the judge noted that “only allegation is that the daughter was not ready to take possession of the body of her mother”, and that there was “absolutely no whisper” of any intent to insult religion or hurt sentiments. “The FIR did not suggest any trespass into burial places, disturbance of funeral rites, or acts amounting to indignity towards the deceased,” she said.Explaining the scope of Section 301, the court said the provision specifically requires elements such as deliberate intent to wound feelings, insult religion, or actions affecting funeral practices. “None of the ingredients are fulfilled to attract the offence,” the court held, adding that the allegations did not meet the statutory threshold for prosecution.The court also underscored that criminal law must be applied with caution, particularly in cases involving personal grief and family decisions.
