Hamit Coskun, who was found guilty of a religiously aggravated public order offence after burning a Koran outside the Turkish consulate in London, has won an appeal at Southwark Crown Court against the conviction.

He was found guilty earlier in June of a religiously aggravated public order offence, having shouted “f*** Islam”, “Islam is the religion of terrorism” and “Koran is burning” while holding the flaming religious text aloft outside the Turkish consulate earlier this year. His case prompted free speech campaigners and some politicians to argue the outcome was an attempt to bring back the blasphemy law.

Mr Justice Bennathan told Southwark Crown Court: “There is no offence of blasphemy in our law. Burning a Koran may be an act that many Muslims find desperately upsetting and offensive.

“The criminal law, however, is not a mechanism that seeks to avoid people being upset, even grievously upset. The right to freedom of expression, if it is a right worth having, must include the right to express views that offend, shock or disturb.”

Referring to Mr Coskun’s conduct outside the Turkish consulate earlier this year, Mr Justice Bennathan told Southwark Crown Court: “This was clearly political speech or conduct.

“Insulting conduct is not sufficient and we should be careful not to read down the words we are considering.”

Mr Justice Bennathan also mentioned the fact that Mr Coskun’s actions were not directed at a person or people in particular.

“We live in a liberal democracy,” the judge continued.

“One of the precious rights that affords us is to express our own views and read, hear and consider ideas without the state intervening to stop us doing so.

“The price we pay for that is having to allow others to exercise the same rights, even if that upsets, offends or shocks us.”

He added: “The criminal courts will interfere to protect people. A person who acts so as to cause harassment, alarm or distress to another may commit an offence.”

The Free Speech Union said the ruling sends a message that “anti-religious protests, however offensive to true believers, must be tolerated”.

Lord Toby Young of Acton, director of the union, which helped fund Mr Coskun’s legal case, said: “We’re delighted.

“Had the verdict been allowed to stand, it would have sent a message to religious fundamentalists up and down the country that all they need to do to enforce their blasphemy codes is to violently attack the blasphemer, thereby making him or her guilty of having caused public disorder.

“Instead, the Crown Court has sent the opposite message – that anti-religious protests, however offensive to true believers, must be tolerated.”

Hamit Coskun said he had come to England to “be able to speak freely about the dangers of radical Islam” and is now “reassured” that he is “free to educate the British public about my beliefs”.

In a statement following the ruling, he said: “I want to thank the Free Speech Union, the National Secular Society, all my lawyers, the MPs who have supported me and the judges for the decision today.

“I came to England, having been persecuted in Turkey, to be able to speak freely about the dangers of radical Islam.  I am reassured that — despite many troubling developments — I will now be free to educate the British public about my beliefs.”