'Not necessary': Union Home ministry stalls Karnataka's hate speech bill, says existing legal framework adequate

Bengaluru: The Amit Shah-led home ministry has blocked Karnataka’s bill on hate speech on the grounds that “existing legal framework” was adequate and a new law “may not be necessary”, documents show.

The Centre State Division of the home ministry has conveyed its stance on the Karnataka Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill.

In February this year, the state government sent the Bill to the ministry of home affairs for President Droupadi Murmu’s assent after Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot refused to clear it.

According to the stringent Bill, committing hate crime (including hate speech) will attract a jail term of one year, extendable up to seven, with a fine of Rs 50,000. Subsequent offences have up to seven years imprisonment and a fine of Rs 1 lakh.

“...it is stated that the issues sought to be addressed are already substantially covered under the existing provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and other prevailing laws,” the home ministry has said in its communication dated May 12, which DH has seen. “Enactment of a separate state legislation may result in duplication and lack of uniformity.”

Karnataka’s law department has now asked the home department to furnish a reply.

In December 2025, the Hate Speech Bill was hurriedly passed in the Karnataka Assembly even as the debate was incomplete, prompting an Opposition walkout when Speaker UT Khader did not agree to further discussions or a House committee to vet the proposed law. The BJP has opposed the Bill, arguing that it would turn the police into “Hitlers” and infringe upon freedom of expression.

In January this year, Governor Gehlot sent back the Bill because it would have “a severe chilling effect on constitutionally-protected democratic discourse”.

The Bill defines ‘hate speech’ as any expression made to cause injury, disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will in “public view”.

Gehlot said the term “public view” is undefined, “potentially covering private WhatsApp groups, limited-audience social media posts or even classroom discussions...granting unanalysed discretion” to authorities.