In a significant move to curb hate speech, the Supreme Court of India has issued directives to the district magistrates and police superintendents of Yavatmal, Maharashtra, and Raipur, Chhattisgarh; for the upcoming rallies organized by the Hindu Janajagruti Samiti and BJP MLA T Raja Singh.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India, today(January 17, 2024) issued directives to the district magistrates and police superintendents of Yavatmal, Maharashtra, and Raipur, Chhattisgarh. This action comes in response to concerns about potential hate speeches during upcoming rallies organized by the Hindu Janajagruti Samiti and BJP MLA T Raja Singh.
The bench, comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta, declined to cancel the scheduled rallies, citing the absence of the accused parties in court. However, they emphasized the need for vigilance, instructing the district authorities to install CCTV cameras with recording capabilities at rally venues. This measure aims to facilitate the identification of individuals responsible for hate speech, should any incidents occur.
This directive follows an application in the ongoing plea of Shaheen Abdulla, which highlighted several instances of reported hate speeches. The court noted specific concerns about a rally by the Hindu Janajagruti Samiti in Yavatmal on January 18 and multiple rallies by T Raja Singh in Raipur from January 19 to 25.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Shaheen Abdullah, expressed frustration over the continued hate speech by T Raja Singh, despite previous FIRs. He urged the court for immediate intervention, highlighting the gravity of the situation. He said,
“When the event takes place, we come to this court and an FIR is lodged. But nothing is done. Then he continues with this kind of speeches. What is the point of all this then? See the kind of hatred he is propagating!”
Justice Khanna acknowledged the objectionable nature of the speeches but expressed reluctance to grant judicial relief at this stage, emphasizing the need for due process. Justice Khanna replied,
“We have passed orders. In one case, we had passed orders and it did stop. That is the positive part. Why only look at the negative aspect?”
The court’s decision reflects a cautious approach, balancing the principles of natural justice with the need to prevent hate speech. This stance is in line with the court’s previous advocacy for practical and effective measures to address the broader issue of hate speech. The court has also sought responses from state governments regarding their compliance with the Tehseen Poonawalla guideline, which mandates the appointment of district-level nodal officers to handle hate crimes and mob violence.
This development underscores the judiciary’s role in upholding constitutional values and ensuring public safety, while also respecting the legal rights of individuals and organizations. The Supreme Court’s directive serves as a reminder of the ongoing challenge of balancing free speech with the need to prevent hate speech and violence.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
