Dear George,
At first I was furious with Penguin India, but having read Wendy's account of how they fought for her book, I have revised my opinion. I learned with astonishment about the Indian law that criminalizes the publisher of a book that causes offence to any Hindu. It is simply incredible, as a piece of law.
So, I think Wendy is probably right, and the culprit is the Indian Penal Code.
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1803184/ :
Central Government Act
Section 295A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860
295A. 5[ Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious
feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.--
Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the
religious feelings of any class of 6[ citizens of India], 7[ by words,
either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or
otherwise] insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious
beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to 8[ three years], or with
fine, or with both.]
I am no historian of law. But this looks to me as though it was framed by the British administration, shortly after the Rebellion.
However inappropriate the application of this law to modern scholarly publishing, I remain incredulous that the court decided that it could be established that Wendy showed "deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the
religious feeling."
I am not sure what action would be appropriate in this case. In the USA, a petition against the book was signed by 10k people. Again, I suppose we could try a petition, but it would not make any difference, and the number of indologists is smaller by several orders than the number of Hindus.
I think the deeper issue here is the fact that an ignorant person (or persons) who does not have sufficient specialist education to understand a particular book is nevertheless able to bring a case that is taken seriously by an Indian court and leads to the banning of that book. Imagine an uneducated farmer taking exception to the work of a nuclear physicist. Would a court say that the physicist should not do his research or publish his findings?
Best,
Dominik