The British can certainly blamed for stirring up religious hatred. They did not create it, but they did exploit it. Repeatedly.
I support the existence of these laws but it really should be used judiciously. This guy did not do this to fan anti-Christian fervor nor did he do this to provoke a violent reaction from Christians.
You don't favor a First Amendment for India sbane? Enforcing a law "judiciously" sounds like a recipe for enhancing government power, favoritism and abuse. That runs the risk of opening up Pandora's Box, as authorities decide what is PC, and what is not.
I do favor free speech but not hate speech that stirs up violence. Of course we can see the problem of the existence of such laws in this very case where something minor is being prosecuted under this law. And the interpretation of what is covered should be something defined by the courts I would think. Considering the history of violence over religion in India, some things should not be allowed to be said in certain contexts. Like how you can't scream "fire" in a crowded movie theater.
