Supreme Court urges citizens to respect free speech while considering rules for social media conduct.
Emphasizes self-restraint over censorship in divisive online content cases.
New Delhi: Today, on July 14, the Supreme Court of India on Monday stressed the importance of citizens understanding and respecting the right to freedom of speech and expression. The Court also said people should follow self-regulation while using social media, especially when it comes to posting offensive or communal content. The Court is now considering creating guidelines to manage such online behaviour.
A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and K V Viswanathan was hearing the case of Wazahat Khan, a man who had several FIRs registered against him in different states such as West Bengal, Assam, Maharashtra, and Haryana.
ALSO READ: CJI Gavai Slams Bulldozer Justice In India: “Right To Shelter Is A Fundamental Right”
Khan had earlier filed a complaint against social media influencer Sharmistha Panoli, accusing her of posting derogatory content about Islam. Her post was related to Operation Sindoor, which was India’s response to the Pahalgam terror attack.
Based on Khan’s complaint, Panoli was arrested and later granted bail. However, after this, FIRs were filed against Khan himself in several states for his own controversial tweets.
Seeking relief, Khan approached the Supreme Court to club all the FIRs filed against him across different states, since they all related to the same set of social media posts.
Earlier, the Court had protected him from arrest in all states except West Bengal. In the latest hearing, the Court extended this interim protection and gave the concerned state authorities four weeks to file their replies to Khan’s plea.
Khan’s lawyer also informed the Court that Khan had now deleted his social media account and was no longer active online. In response, Justice Nagarathna noted that simply deleting a post does not remove its impact once it’s been made public.
She said:
“There is no question of taking it down, because once it is posted, it is out there. Freedom of speech and expression is a very, very important freedom and a fundamental right. But if there is abuse of that freedom, it leads to litigation and clogs courts.”
The judge went on to express concern about how such cases are overwhelming the legal system and taking attention away from other serious crimes.
She stated:
“There are also other criminal cases the police can attend to instead of chasing these kinds of cases. What is the solution to this? We are not asking from the point of view of the State, we are asking from the point of view of citizens. Constantly, these kinds of things are happening.”
Justice Nagarathna underlined that citizens must be aware of their boundaries when exercising rights like freedom of speech, and shouldn’t compel the government to step in.
She said:
“Instead of the State having to regulate, why can’t the citizens have restraints themselves? Citizens must know the value of freedom of speech and expression. If they don’t, then the State will step in – and who wants the State to step in? Nobody wants the State to step in.”
ALSO READ: MS Dhoni To Delhi High Court: ‘Defamation Suit Against Me,Not Maintainable’
She explained that merely having an opinion is not enough — it is the way in which it is expressed that matters. The judge stated:
“Having an opinion is one thing, but to say that in a particular way is an abuse. Sometimes, it will not come in the court in the context of hate speech. My learned brother rightly said that there should be fraternity between the citizens – then all this hate will come down.”
Justice Nagarathna stressed that although Article 19(1)(a) gives every citizen the right to free speech, this right is not absolute and must be balanced with the reasonable restrictions in Article 19(2).
She said:
“Reasonable restrictions are rightly put. It can’t be a 100% absolute right. But citizens are abusing the freedom.”
She also raised concerns about how freedom of speech is increasingly being misused on social media and other digital platforms. While some might think this would lead to censorship, the Court clarified its true concern lies in protecting constitutional values.
She explained:
“In the interest of fraternity, secularism and dignity of individuals… It is not just about this petitioner. We will have to go into this beyond the petitioner.”
Justice K V Viswanathan, who was sitting on the bench with Justice Nagarathna, observed that one possible solution could lie in social awareness.
He asked:
“When citizens react to this by not following… If less and less people follow these kinds of tweets, how do you create this awareness?”
In reply, a State counsel said that a kind of “social boycott” could help tackle such online speech. He suggested:
“Essentially, starting a social movement in the context of identification of hate or other kinds of egregious speech and then doing that social boycott at the very beginning.”
However, Justice Viswanathan responded with skepticism about whether such an idea would be effective in today’s world, saying:
“Easier said than done. When will people start to find it jarring?”
ALSO READ: High Court Dismisses Zee Media’s Appeal in Dhoni’s Defamation Case
The Court made it clear that while free speech is a fundamental right, it must come with a sense of responsibility and discipline among citizens.
The bench asked the lawyers to come prepared to help the Court in framing possible rules or guidelines that would encourage people to use their freedom of expression wisely and without causing communal disharmony.
Case Title:
Wazahat Khan v. Union of India and Ors.,Case no. – W.P.(Crl.) No. 247/2025
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Fundamental Rights
