NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India has given Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) leader Tejashwi Yadav a week’s time to submit a clear and unequivocal statement retracting his controversial comment about the Gujarati community. This directive from the apex court highlights the judiciary’s stance on maintaining communal harmony and the responsible use of speech by public figures. The Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan sought a simple and clear statement from Tejashwi Yadav and gave directives to him.
Supreme Court’s Directive to Tejashwi Yadav
The Bench, comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, emphasized the need for a straightforward and unambiguous statement from Yadav. This decision came after the respondent (complainant) expressed dissatisfaction with Yadav’s previous statement, which they found unclear in terms of withdrawing the remarks.
The court’s oral remark,
“Whatever he has said against the particular community or a people of a particular state, that only requires withdrawal,”
-underscores the need for specificity and clarity in Yadav’s retraction.
Background of the Controversy
Tejashwi Yadav, a prominent political figure, faced criticism last year for his remark,
“Gujarati hi thag hai aur ho sakta hai” (only Gujaratis are cheat and can be cheats).
This statement sparked a debate on the responsible use of language by politicians and its impact on community relations.
Legal Proceedings and Responses
Responding to the court’s directive, the respondent’s counsel argued that Yadav’s remarks were intended to harm the entire Gujarati community and that their client was not satisfied with the current statement. In response, the court requested Yadav’s counsel to file a new statement within a week, explicitly withdrawing the remarks.
The court’s statement,
“We grant the time of one week to the petitioner (Yadav) to file a proper statement in terms of what transpired today in the court,”
indicates the judiciary’s commitment to resolving the issue in a manner that acknowledges the gravity of the remarks and their potential impact.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Questions Continuation of Prosecution in Tejashwi Yadav’s Defamation Case
Previous Court Proceedings
Last week, the court queried complainant Haresh Mehta on the necessity of continuing the prosecution, given Yadav’s withdrawal of his remarks about Gujaratis. The court was deliberating on a transfer petition filed by Yadav, seeking to move the criminal defamation complaint filed against him over the remark from Ahmedabad to a venue outside Gujarat.
Implications and Significance
This development is significant as it highlights the judiciary’s role in moderating political discourse and ensuring that public figures maintain a level of decorum in their statements. The outcome of this case is likely to set a precedent for how political speech, especially comments on communities or states, is treated under the law.
Conclusion
As the nation awaits Yadav’s response, this incident serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between freedom of expression and the responsibility that comes with it, especially for those in positions of power and influence. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for political discourse in India, potentially shaping the way leaders engage with issues of community and ethnicity in the future.
The Supreme Court’s intervention in the Tejashwi Yadav case is a critical moment in India’s ongoing discourse on free speech, communal harmony, and political accountability. It underscores the importance of responsible speech by public figures and the judiciary’s active role in upholding communal harmony and respect for all communities in India’s diverse society.
FOLLOW US ON X(TWITTER) FOR MORE AND BRISK LEGAL UPDATES.