Back
Rahul Easwar Seeks Direction to to Remove Objectionable Sabarimala Content
The has directed that steps be taken to issue notice to social media giant and Dalit writer-activist Sunny Kapikad in a petition filed by right-wing commentator Rahul Easwar. The petition seeks the removal of a Facebook video allegedly containing vulgar and sexually explicit remarks about the Sabarimala deities Lord Ayyappa and Malikappurathamma.
The Case at a Glance
Rahul Easwar moved the court under , praying for a direction to police authorities to register a formal criminal case against Kapikad and to compel and other intermediaries to temporarily block, take down, or disable public access to the impugned video. The petition also sought action against any related online content. Easwar’s counsel submitted that steps would be taken forthwith to serve notice on the unserved respondents.
and Observations
When the matter came up before Justice G. Girish, the court noted, “No steps taken to issue notice to respondents 4 and 5,” referring to and Sunny Kapikad. The public prosecutor had earlier taken notice on behalf of the state respondents, including the Home Secretary, the District Police Chief, and the Station House Officers of Sreekaryam and the Cyber Crime Police Station.
Relying on a previous order in , where the court had directed to block a journalist account containing objectionable posts, Easwar’s plea argued that similar action was warranted in this case. The court posted the matter to for further consideration after ensuring compliance with the earlier order.
Legal Framework and Implications
The petition underscores the growing tension between free speech online and the regulation of content that allegedly offends religious sentiments. While no final order has been passed, the case highlights the court’s willingness to consider directing intermediaries to remove content that may fall foul of the ’s . The outcome could set a significant precedent for how social media platforms respond to complaints involving vulgar or sexually explicit remarks about deities.
What Happens Next
With the case adjourned to , the court will await compliance with the notice issuance and may pass further orders. The petition remains pending, and the video in question continues to be accessible pending judicial determination. This interim stage reflects the court’s careful balancing of with the urgency of the petitioner’s grievance.
