SC asks states and Centre to take Hate speech cases seriously

New Delhi, Jan 14: The Supreme Court (SC) on Friday told the Centre and states to take instances of hate speech seriously, and observed that it was nothing short of a “menace” that if left unchecked, could become a monster.

 

 

 

Hearing a batch of cases highlighting inaction by states in acting against instances of hate speech made against Muslims and Christians, a bench of justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna said: “This is a complete menace and nothing short of it. We should all be careful about the seriousness of hate speech... We should not end up creating a Frankenstein(‘s monster) that will gobble (us) up.”

 

 

 

The court reminded states that any action against perpetrators of hate speech should be irrespective of religion as the crime committed is against society, regardless of who the speaker is. This was a reiteration of the order passed by the Court in the same case on October 21 last year while directing states to register suo moto complaints on hate speech. While stating that free speech in the country should be protected, the court felt that this balance is often being misused by TV channels. “Media occupies a position of great strength. Any misuse by them impacts the whole nation. This freedom comes with responsibility,” the bench said. The Centre represented by Additional Solicitor General (ASG) KM Nataraj suggested there were enough checks and balances to which the bench replied, “What is the use if it is not applied in a manner that does not produce results? For so many years, there is no regulatory mechanism for television. It is free for all.” Wondering whether the time had come to deal with news anchors and channel heads with a heavy hand, the bench said, “In a live program, the key lies with the anchor. If the anchor is not acting in a fair manner, there should be power to take off an anchor. How many times have you taken off anchors?” Nataraj told the court that the Centre is contemplating a comprehensive law on the issue of hate crimes and regulation of such content online. “As a state, we do not subscribe to hate crimes. It cannot take the color of any religion.” But the court replied, “The buck stops at you. What are you doing to control it (hate speech)? We don’t like governments to come in at all as it is a matter of free speech. But in certain areas, it affects harmony in the society.”

 

Also Read: Why even elect state government then? SC asks Centre 

 

Advocate Nizam Pasha appearing for one of the petitioners pointed out that despite the Court’s direction of October 21 asking states to register suo moto complaints of hate speech, there has been no change on the ground. He produced a speech by Sudershan TV editor Suresh Chavhanke at an event organized by Hindu Janajagruti Samiti in Maharashtra on December 12 spewing hate against Muslims and Christians. Pasha moved an application seeking to seek responses from Maharashtra and three other states of Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan, and Haryana where similar instances of hate speech and protests inciting violence were reported early this year. The plea said, “It is clear that the cases of hate speeches have been on the rise across the country...Strict action ought to be taken against the speakers and participants present at the aforementioned events and also against the authorities that failed in preventing such an event from happening.” The cases before the Court also included previous instances of hate speech given in 2021 in Delhi, Uttarakhand, and Uttar Pradesh where the Court has already passed orders and directed states to file status reports. A separate petition alleging inaction of the Delhi police to act against the perpetrators of the Delhi hate speech involving Chavhunke dating back to December 19, 2021, also came up for hearing before a bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud. Noting the delay on part of the Delhi police to register the crime in May 2022, the bench, also comprising justice PS Narasimha asked, “Why do you (police) require five months to register FIR.” The comment came while hearing a contempt petition filed by Mahatma Gandhi’s great-grandson Tushar Gandhi. The Court granted two weeks to the investigating officer of the case to produce details of the persons arrested, the status of the probe, and the charge sheet.

 

Also Read: Sachin Pilot's solo campaign worries Rajasthan Congress 

 

Chavhanke’s lawyer Vishnu Shankar Jain appeared in the batch of cases with an application highlighting the conduct of the petitioners in projecting speeches made by Hindu leaders while ignoring communal speeches by Muslim leaders such as Zakir Naik, Member of Parliament Asaduddin Owaisi and his brother and Telangana MLA Akbaruddin Owaisi made against Hindus. The Court allowed Jain to withdraw the application and file a fresh application showing their recent speeches as the ones cited in the application were termed by the Court as “stale”.

In one of the petitions, an instance that took place in Uttar Pradesh in July 2021 was highlighted where a Muslim man’s complaint alleging religious slur by a group of youth in Noida was not registered by the UP Police to date. Senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi told the Court that the state is expected to be sensitive to a citizen’s complaint. Instead, he added, “The attitude of the state is to show the victim is a liar.”