Sanjay Kishan Kaul labels MF Husain case as organised harassment

The 2008 case and the abuse of legal process

In 2008 Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul presided over the MF Husain case after it had been adjourned sixteen times by his predecessor. He described the multiple criminal complaints filed across India as "organised harassment masquerading as religious sentiment". Kaul limited his judgment to the specific work mentioned in the complaint, stating he was not there to pass judgment on the artist's entire oeuvre or character.

Defining obscenity in Indian law

Under that provision a work is obscene if it is lascivious, appeals to prurient interest, or tends to corrupt and deprave those who see it. Kaul cited the Ranjit Udeshi precedent, where a Mumbai bookseller faced prosecution for selling D.H. Lawrence’s "Lady Chatterley’s Lover". Supreme Court jurisprudence holds that nudity or sexual themes do not automatically render art obscene; the work must be assessed in its entirety, with artistic merit outweighing any alleged obscenity. Applying that test, Kaul concluded the painting was neither lascivious nor an appeal to prurient interest, and therefore did not meet the statutory definition of obscenity.

Historical context and the 'Bharat Mata' controversy

The painting popularly known as "Bharat Mata" acquired that title from an enthusiastic collector, not from Husain himself. Kaul referenced historic Indian art, citing temples at Halebidu, Belur, Khajuraho and a Jain temple in Jaisalmer, to illustrate a tradition of liberal artistic expression that supports the work’s legitimacy.

The role of law clerks in the judgment

Law clerks Radhika Arora and Radhika Biswajit Dubey assisted the author during his time at the High Court. The author noted that recruiting quality law clerks was difficult at the High Court, unlike at the Supreme Court, which had access to graduates from the National Law School.

Radhika Arora, who had family connections to the BJP–RSS, provided perspective as an artist. She initially questioned the author's approach to the case because of public controversy regarding MF Husain's depictions of Hindu gods. She later understood the distinction between aesthetic and prurient nudity.

Radhika Biswajit Dubey initially felt that painting 'Bharat Mata' unclothed was inappropriate. She researched the law, the public mood, and the circumstances surrounding the creation of the painting. Some of her findings appeared in the final judgment.

Final ruling on the painting's legality

The court concluded that the complaints against MF Husain were an 'abuse of process'.