On Tuesday, the Supreme Court made it clear that it is neither equipped nor inclined to monitor or legislate against every incident of hate speech across the country. The bench, comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta, emphasised that existing legislative provisions, police stations, and high courts are already in place to address such issues.
The remarks came during the hearing of an application concerning alleged calls for the social and economic boycott of a particular community. The Bench told the applicant, We are not legislating in the garb of this petition. Rest assured, we are not inclined to either legislate or monitor every small incident that takes place in X, Y, Z pocket of this country. There are high courts, there are police stations, and there are legislative measures. They are already in place.
The Court noted that the applicant had been previously advised to approach the respective high court with his grievance. “How can this court continue to monitor all such instances all over the country? You approach the authorities. Let them take action; otherwise, go to the high court,” the bench said.
The Applicant’s counsel argued that the authorities had failed to act despite calls for an economic boycott being circulated, and that some public representatives were allegedly issuing similar statements. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing in court, highlighted that hate speech is not restricted to any one community, stressing that public interest cannot be selective. “There are severe hate speeches going on amongst all religions. I will supply those details to my friend (applicant). Let him add that and espouse that public cause on a pan-religion basis,” he said.
While reiterating that hate speech is unacceptable, the bench stressed that mechanisms exist under the law, and the applicant could approach the jurisdictional high court for relief. Earlier, the top court had indicated that if the State failed to act on hate speech, the police were expected to take suo-motu action, failing which contempt proceedings could be initiated.
The applicant also referred to an October 2022 Supreme Court order directing three states to crack down on hate speech and cited another instance involving a minister in Assam, allegedly referencing the 1989 Bhagalpur violence in comments about Bihar’s cauliflower farming.
The Supreme Court has scheduled further hearing of the matter on December 9.
Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.
Picture Source :
