SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K.M. JOSEPH, HRISHIKESH ROY, JJ.
SHAHEEN ABDULLA - PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. - RESPONDENT(S)
WRIT PETITION(S)(CIVIL) NO.940 OF 2022
Decided On : 21-10-2022
Hate Speech - Secularism and Fraternity - Indian Penal Code Sections 153A, 153B, 505, 295A - The court emphasized the duty to protect fundamental rights, preserve constitutional values, and the secular democratic character of the nation. It directed law enforcement to take immediate action under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code to address hate speech and maintain the secular character of the country.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner raised a complaint about the growing climate of hate in the country, particularly hate speeches against the Muslim community, and expressed concern about the inaction despite suitable provisions in penal law being available.
Finding of the Court:
The court acknowledged the seriousness of the complaint and emphasized its duty to protect fundamental rights, preserve constitutional values, and the secular democratic character of the nation. It directed law enforcement to take immediate action under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code to address hate speech and maintain the secular character of the country.
Issues: The issues revolved around the inaction against hate speeches and the duty of the court to protect fundamental rights and preserve the secular character of the nation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the need to protect fundamental rights, preserve constitutional values, and maintain the secular character of the nation, leading to the direction for immediate action under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code.
Final Decision: The court issued directions to law enforcement to take immediate action under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code to address hate speech and maintain the secular character of the country, with a warning of contempt of court for any hesitation to act.
ORDER :
1. Heard Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned senior counsel for the petitioner.
2. The complaint which has been raised in the instant writ petition appears to be very serious. It relates to the growing climate of hate in the country. This is attributable according to the petitioner to an unending flow of what is described as hate speeches being made by various persons against the Muslim community. The instances are chronicled, though in an abridged form, in the writ petition. The complaint of the petitioner is one of despondency and angst arising from the perception that despite suitable provisions in penal law being available, there is inaction or rather total inaction.
3. The Constitution of India envisages Bharat as a secular nation and fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and unity and the integrity of the country is the guiding principle enshrined in the Preamble. There cannot be fraternity unless members of community drawn from different religions or castes of the country are able to live in harmony. The petitioners points out that there are appropriate provisions such as Sections 153A, 153B, 505, and 295A of the Indian Penal Code. He voices his concern that no action has been taken even after this Court has been approached in the matter and the transgressions have only increased.
4. We feel that this Court is charged with the duty to protect the fundamental rights and also preserve the constitutional values and the secular democratic character of the nation and in particular, the rule of law.
5. The matter needs examination, and some form of interim directions.
6. Issue notice.
7. Respondent No.2-Commissioner of Police, New Delhi, Respondent No.3-Director General of Police Uttarakhand and Respondent No.4- Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh will file a report as to what action has been taken in regard to such acts as are the subject matter of this writ petition within their jurisdiction.
8. Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 shall ensure that immediately as and when any speech or any action takes place which attracts offences such as Sections 153A, 153B and 295A and 505 of the IPC etc., suo moto action will be taken to register cases even if no complaint is forthcoming and proceed against the offenders in accordance with law. Respondent Nos.2 to 4 will therefore issue direction(s) to their subordinates so that appropriate action in law will be taken at the earliest.
9. We make it clear that any hesitation to act in accordance with this direction will be viewed as contempt of this Court and appropriate action will be taken against the erring officers.
10. We further make it clear that such action will be taken irrespective of the religion that the maker of the speech or the person who commit such act belongs to, so that the secular character of Bharat as is envisaged by the Preamble, is preserved and protected.
AI
The duty of the court to protect fundamental rights, preserve constitutional values, and maintain the secular character of the nation, leading to the direction for immediate action under relevant sec....
Courts cannot create criminal offences for hate speech as existing laws suffice; FIR registration mandatory sans prior sanction at pre-cognizance stage; no continuing mandamus where statutory remedie....
The court mandates authorities to address complaints of hate speech promptly under specified statutory provisions.
The FIR lacks necessary ingredients for offences under Section 196(1)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, justifying its quashing due to vagueness.
FIR quashed - Through Facebook ID, posted objectionable material - Religious sentiments - Petitioner has shared post of other person, even, contents of FIR does not, prima facie, establish alleged of....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.