JOIN USSC directs all states, UTs to register cases against those making hate speeches even in absence of complaint
The Supreme Court on Friday said hate speech is a serious offence affecting the social fabric of the nation as it directed all States and Union Territories to take suo moto action against the makers of hate speech irrespective of religion.
The top court directed all States/ UTs to take action against the accused in order to preserve secular character of the country, while extending its order passed on October 21, 2022 with regard to incidents in Uttarakhand and Uttar Pradesh to pan India.
"Hate speech is a serious offence...it goes to the heart of the Republic and affects dignity of the people," a bench of Justices K M Joseph and B V Nagarathna said.
The bench also stressed both the judges are apolitical and do not care about party A or party B or party C.
"We only know…the Constitution and the laws of the country….let us be very clear about it…..whatever order we pass, it is allegiance to the oath we have taken,” the bench said.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that nobody can justify the hate speech. "If any such speech is made, what is to be done is given in Tehseen Poonawalla judgement (2018)," he said.
"One petition is filed targetting one community. Please consider this if this court should take action in such matters," he submitted.
When a counsel referred to instances of hate speeches in various parts of the country, the bench said, “Don't bring in politics. If the attempt is to bring in politics, we won't be a party to this...we said in our order, irrespective of religion (action should be taken), what more do you want”.
The bench also warned that any delay in registering cases will be treated as contempt of the court, while emphasising that its October 21, 2022 order should be made applicable irrespective of religion.
The bench said it is entertaining petitions against hate speeches in different parts of the country for “larger public good” and to ensure establishment of “rule of law”.
Appearing for Shaheen Abdullah, advocate Nizam Pasha submitted that the court had earlier ordered the police to take suo moto action and if police are not acting, it should treated as contempt.
Mehta said let all states be joined in the matter.
The court emphasised action was necessary in hate speech cases in order to preserve secular character of Bharat as envisaged by the Preamble.