What is IPC Section 298?
IPC Section 298 falls within Chapter XV of the Indian Penal Code ("Of Offences Relating to Religion"), the final and comparatively least severe provision in this group of sections (295 to 298), which are together aimed at preserving communal harmony by criminalizing acts intended to hurt or insult religious sentiment. While Section 295 addresses physical destruction or defilement of places of worship, and Section 295A addresses deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings through more serious or organized conduct, Section 298 covers the everyday scenario of individual verbal, gestural, or object-based acts done with the specific intent to wound another's religious feelings.
The section is broadly worded to capture uttering a word, making a sound, making a gesture, or placing an object within the sight of the targeted person — but the essential and often decisive ingredient is the "deliberate intention" of wounding religious feelings. Courts have consistently held that this requires clear proof of specific intent; a statement or act made in the course of ordinary conversation, academic discussion, or without the specific purpose of insult, even if it incidentally causes offence, does not fall within this section.
Important Update: IPC to BNS Transition
With effect from 1 July 2024, the Indian Penal Code has been replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 for offences committed on or after that date. Section 298 IPC now corresponds to Section 302 of the BNS, which retains the identical definition, punishment, and classification. FIRs/complaints registered before 1 July 2024 continue to be tried under IPC 298; incidents after that date are registered under the corresponding BNS provision.
Legal Provision — Text of Section 298 IPC
Section 298 must be read alongside Section 295 (injuring or defiling a place of worship), Section 295A (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings, carrying up to 3 years), and Section 296 (disturbing a religious assembly). Its comparatively lower punishment reflects its position as covering more individual, less organized acts of intended religious insult.
Punishment Under Section 298
| Imprisonment | Imprisonment of either description (simple or rigorous) for a term which may extend to 1 year |
|---|---|
| Fine | Or with fine, or with both imprisonment and fine |
| Nature of Offence | Non-Cognizable — police cannot investigate or arrest without a Magistrate's order/warrant |
| Bailable / Non-Bailable | Bailable — bail is a matter of right |
| Compoundable | Compoundable — the case can be settled between the parties |
| Triable By | Any Magistrate |
| Related Provisions | Section 295 (injuring/defiling place of worship), Section 295A (malicious acts outraging religious feelings), Section 296 (disturbing religious assembly) |
Key Ingredients / Essential Elements
Uttering a word, making a sound, a gesture, or placing an object
The act must be one of these four specific forms of conduct — verbal, auditory, gestural, or the visible placement of an object.
The act must be within the hearing or sight of the targeted person
The word/sound must be in the hearing of the person, and the gesture/object must be in their sight.
Deliberate intention to wound religious feelings
This is the central and often decisive ingredient — the act must be done with a specific, deliberate purpose of hurting the religious sentiments of the targeted person, not merely as an incidental or unintended effect.
The feelings wounded must be religious in nature
The offence is specifically concerned with harm to religious sentiment, distinguishing it from general insult or defamation, which are addressed under separate provisions.
What Should You Do — For Complainants and For the Accused
If Your Religious Feelings Were Deliberately Wounded
- Since the offence is non-cognizable, file a formal complaint before the Magistrate rather than expecting the police to register a direct FIR.
- Document the specific words, sounds, gestures, or objects involved, along with witnesses who can corroborate the incident and the deliberate intent behind it.
- Consider whether the incident might also fall within the more serious Section 295A, if it reflects a broader, more deliberate or malicious campaign to outrage religious feelings.
If You Are Accused Under Section 298
- Since the offence is bailable, bail can typically be secured without significant difficulty.
- A key defence is to show that the act was not done with the specific "deliberate intention" of wounding religious feelings — for example, if the statement was made in the course of academic, artistic, or general discussion without such intent.
- Since the offence is compoundable, explore whether the matter can be resolved through settlement with the complainant, potentially avoiding a lengthy trial.
Complaint & Bail Process Under Section 298
Filing a Complaint
Being non-cognizable, the aggrieved person must file a formal complaint before a Magistrate rather than relying on a police FIR.
Magistrate's Examination
The Magistrate examines the complaint and evidence to determine whether the requisite deliberate intention to wound religious feelings is prima facie established.
Bail
Being bailable, the accused is entitled to bail as a matter of right if summoned or arrested in connection with the case.
Trial or Compounding
The case proceeds to trial before the Magistrate, though being compoundable, the parties may settle the matter at any stage.
Important / Landmark Cases on Section 298
Ramji Lal Modi v. State of U.P. (1957)
While primarily addressing Section 295A, the Supreme Court's discussion of the religion-related provisions in the IPC (Chapter XV) clarified that these sections must be understood together as a scheme intended to protect religious sentiment while respecting the constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression, subject to reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order.
Emphasis on "Deliberate Intention" as the Key Ingredient
Courts examining Section 298 cases have consistently emphasized that mere hurt feelings, without proof of the accused's deliberate and specific intention to wound religious sentiment, are insufficient to sustain a conviction — the prosecution must establish this specific state of mind.