'Constitutionally impermissible to villify any community': SC on 'Ghooskhor Pandat' row

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has said, it is constitutionally impermissible for anybody, be it the State or non-state actors, through any medium, such as, speeches, memes, cartoons, visual arts etc to vilify and denigrate any community. 

"It will be violative of the Constitution to target any particular community on the basis of religion, language, caste or region by whosoever he or she may be. This is particularly true for public figures occupying high constitutional office who have taken the solemn oath to uphold the Constitution,'' Justice Ujjal Bhuyan said.

The judge's order came days after the Supreme Court separately declined to take up a plea against Assam Chief Minister Hemant Biswa Sarma against his 'Miya' remarks.

In his separate opinion rendered on February 19, 2026 in a writ petition filed by Atul Mishra against the title of the movie 'Ghooskhor Pandat', Justice Bhuyan dealt on the concept of fraternity and free speech.

He cited Imran Pratapgarhi case, in which a two-judge bench had said, ''75 years into our republic, we cannot be seen to be so shaky on our fundamentals that mere recital of a poem or for that matter, any form of art or entertainment, such as, stand-up comedy, can be alleged to lead to animosity or hatred amongst different communities. Subscribing to such a view would stifle all legitimate expressions of view in the public domain which is so fundamental to a free society.''

As the film-maker Neeraj Pandey withdrew the controversial title, Justice Bhuyan said, "This would equally apply to the title of a movie as well. I say this and no more. Though no adjudication was called for in this case, I felt it necessary to restate the first principles, lest there remain any lingering misconception.''

In his order, Justice Bjuyan highlighted that the idea of fraternity was envisioned as a deep sense of well-being for others and understood as essential to counterbalance individualism, thereby preventing anarchy and sustaining moral order in society. 

The judge pointed out, Dr B R Ambedkar’s introduction of the term ‘fraternity’ into the constitutional Preamble reflected his persistent efforts towards eradicating caste discrimination, his advocacy for unity and brotherhood which mirrors his commitment to inclusivity. 

"Unlike the West, in India, fraternity is distinctly perceived as a vital instrument for realising equality and harmonizing the diverse segments of society. It serves as a conduit for transcending societal disparities and working towards collective well-being. Therefore, in the Indian constitutional context, fraternity assumes a dynamic and inclusive role, aligning with the broader goals of social justice, equality and upliftment,'' he wrote.