One cannot deny that there has been a very steep increase in hate speech in the country. It seems it’s incredibly easy these days to rile up people against certain communities and groups and commit acts of aggression against them.
Today, the Indian Supreme Court promptly called out such incidents and asked for more stringent action to be taken against them. The SC has asked the governments of NCT of Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand to take instant action against hate speech crimes that are happening in their areas.
What Has The Supreme Court Said?
The bench, including Justices KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy, was apparently listening to a petition asking for the court to urgently intervene and stop the “growing menace of targeting and terrorizing the Muslim Community in India”.
The plea filed by journalist Shaheen Abdullah had pointed out the incident of rising hate speeches and hate crimes against the Muslim community and others. It called out politicians and more who were making communally divisive comments and asked for the governments of the different states to “initiate independent, credible and impartial probe into the incidents of hate crimes and hate speeches across the country.”
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who is representing the petitioners read out a few statements by BJP MP Parvesh Varma, where he is supposedly asking people not to promote Muslim shop owners.
On 9th October, Varma was seen speaking at an event in Delhi and saying that
“Jahan jahan yeh aaapko dikhaee de, mai kehta hun, agar inka dimaag thik karna hai… toh ek hi ilaaj hai, woh hai sampurna bahishkar…
Aap is baat se sehmat ho? Haath khada kar ke bolo agar sehmat ho toh. Mere saath bolo hum inka sampurna bahishkar karenge, hum inki dukan rediyon se koi samaan nahin kharidenge, hum inko koi mazdoori nahi denge.”
(“Wherever you see them, I say that if you want to set their minds straight … then there is only one remedy, that is complete boycott…
Do you agree with this? Raise your hand if you agree. Say with me, we will completely boycott them, we will not buy any goods from their shops, we will not employ them”.)
Read More: Bengali Rapper EPR Raps About ISIS Style Udaipur Beheading, And More
The SC has asked the Delhi Police to submit an action-taken report in regard to these speeches made by Varma and others.
In its official order, the apex court said that
“Respondent No.2-Commissioner of Police, New Delhi, Respondent No.3-Director General of Police Uttarakhand and Respondent No.4- Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh will file a report as to what action has been taken in regard to such acts as are the subject matter of this writ petition within their jurisdiction.
Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 shall ensure that immediately as and when any speech or any action takes place which attracts offences such as Sections 153A, 153B and 295A and 505 of the IPC etc., suo 3 moto action will be taken to register cases even if no complaint is
forthcoming and proceed against the offenders in accordance with law.Respondent Nos.2 to 4 will therefore issue direction(s) to their subordinates so that appropriate action in law will be taken at the earliest.”
The court also added that
“We further make it clear that such action will be taken irrespective of the religion that the maker of the speech or the person who commit such act belongs to, so that the secular character of Bharat as is envisaged by the Preamble, is preserved and protected.”
The bench also commented that “Statements are certainly very shocking for a country that professes to be a democracy and religion neutral. This is the 21st century. What have we reduced God to? Article 51 says we should have a scientific temper and in the name of religion, this is tragic.”
Further, it added that “The complaint raised is very serious… related to rising climate of hate in the country that has led to hate speeches. The unity and integrity of the nation is one of the guiding principles enshrined in the Preamble, as well as fraternity ensuring the dignity of the individual,” adding, “the matter needs examination.”
Justice Roy also observed that these statements were “very shocking” especially given that India is a religion neutral country and that “If you say something offensive to penal provisions that should be looked into. A particular kind of statement against a particular community is being highlighted here. The court should not be seen to be on one side.”
Image Credits: Google Images
Sources: Hindustan Times, Live Law, The Indian Express
Find the blogger: @chirali_08
This post is tagged under: hate speech, hate speech india, hate speech supreme court, supreme court, supreme court india, Justice KM Joseph, Justice Hrishikesh Roy, hate crime, hate crime india
Disclaimer: We do not hold any right, copyright over any of the images used, these have been taken from Google. In case of credits or removal, the owner may kindly mail us.
Other Recommendations:
FlippED: Our Bloggers Argue Whether Religion Hinders Rational Thinking
