[BREAKING] Action Against PM Modi, BJP for Hate Speech During Campaign | SC Dismisses Plea

The Supreme Court Today (May 14th) dismissed a petition seeking directions to the Election Commission of India (ECI) for action against the alleged hate speeches delivered by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leaders, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi, during the ongoing Lok Sabha elections.

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court declined to entertain a petition requesting directives to the Election Commission of India (ECI) regarding alleged hate speeches made by leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), including Prime Minister Narendra Modi, amidst the ongoing Lok Sabha elections.

A Bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma elucidated that the Court was disinclined to issue any mandates to the ECI on this matter, citing limitations under Article 32 of the Constitution.

“We are not inclined to interfere. We cannot issue such directions under Article 32. Dismissed,”

-stated Justice Nath succinctly when the case was brought before the Bench for consideration.

The petition, lodged the previous week, specifically highlighted speeches delivered by PM Modi, Union Minister Anurag Singh Thakur, and content disseminated by the BJP on its social media platforms.

The plea underscored,

“Despite constituting a serious breach of the Model Code of Conduct, the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and the Representation of People Act, 1951, and significantly contributing to the deterioration of communal harmony within the nation, the Election Commission of India has failed to undertake decisive action, notwithstanding repeated efforts to notify and prompt the statutory body of its obligatory responsibilities.”

The plea presented several specific instances of alleged hate speech:

• On April 21, 2024, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Minister of Information and Broadcasting, as well as Youth Affairs and Sports, Anurag Singh Thakur, purportedly delivered speeches demonizing and stereotyping the Muslim community, disseminated through various mediums across the nation.

• Subsequently, on April 30, 2024, the Bharatiya Janata Party shared an animated video on its official Instagram account, echoing the hate speech attributed to Prime Minister Narendra Modi on April 21. This video was subsequently reposted by party members.

• On May 6, 2024, a similar video was allegedly uploaded on X, formerly Twitter, by Shri Arvind Dharmapuri, a sitting Member of Parliament affiliated with the Bharatiya Janata Party, representing Nizamabad, Telangana.

The petition further asserted that the Election Commission of India (ECI) had displayed proactive measures in addressing concerns regarding opposition parties. Notably, the ECI issued directives to the Aam Aadmi Party, mandating alterations to their campaign anthem, purportedly due to perceived insinuations against the Bharatiya Janata Party and the judiciary.

Additionally, the plea highlighted an instance where Shri K. Chandrasekhar Rao, the Founder of Bharat Rashtra Samithi, was barred from campaigning over alleged derogatory remarks against the Indian National Congress. These interventions were initiated suo motu by the Election Commission.

The petition emphasized that such actions delineate distinct provisions and standards of adherence applicable to the incumbent government, with a notably higher threshold of compliance under the Model Code of Conduct.

The argument posited that the Election Commission had “completely failed” in its constitutional duty to ensure free and fair elections by purportedly permitting repeated violations of not only the Model Code of Conduct but also other pertinent laws. This contention underscores a broader concern regarding the equitable enforcement of electoral regulations and the impartiality of electoral oversight mechanisms.

The Court’s decision not to intervene reflects the delicate balance between judicial oversight and the autonomy of electoral bodies in overseeing the conduct of elections and enforcing regulatory frameworks. It underscores the importance of respecting constitutional mandates while navigating contentious issues related to electoral integrity and political discourse.

CASE TITLE:
Dr. Emani Anantha Satyanarayana Sarma & Anr v. Election Commission of India

Click Here to Read Previous Reports on PM Modi

FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES