scorecardresearch
Friday, Mar 29, 2024
Advertisement

Country secular, take suo motu action against hate speeches: SC tells 3 states

The bench was hearing a plea seeking an urgent intervention to stop the growing atrocities on Muslims in India. “Article 51A says we should develop a scientific temper. And where have we reached in the name of religion? It is tragic," it rued.

The Supreme Court was hearing a petition on hate speeches. The Supreme Court was hearing a petition on hate speeches.

The Supreme Court Friday asked governments of NCT of Delhi, Uttarakhand and Uttar Pradesh to take suo motu action against any hate speech crimes taking place within their jurisdiction, without even waiting for any complaint, the Live Law reported.

Noting that “the Constitution of India envisages a secular nation and fraternity among citizens assuring the dignity of the individual”, the apex court bench, comprising Justices KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy, directed the three governments to furnish a report before the court regarding the actions taken against those indulging in hate crimes within their jurisdiction.

“The unity and integrity of the nation is one of the guiding principles enshrined in the preamble. There cannot be fraternity unless the members of the community from different religions are able to live in harmony. The petitioner points out despite various penal provisions, no action has been taken and there is a need to serve constitutional principles. We feel this court is charged with a duty to protect the fundamental rights and also protect and serve the constitution where the rule of law is maintained,” the top court said.

Advertisement

The bench was hearing a plea seeking an urgent intervention to stop the growing atrocities on Muslims in India. “Article 51A says we should develop a scientific temper. And where have we reached in the name of religion? It is tragic,” it rued.

The bench warned any delay by the administration in acting on this “very serious issue” will invite the court’s contempt.

Festive offer

Reading out certain statements by BJP MP Parvesh Varma, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared for the petitioners, said that during an event in Delhi, Varma had urged not to encourage Muslim shop owners.

Sibal pointed out that the administration and even the apex court have not been taking any action despite multiple complaints raised over such cases, except for asking for status report. “Silence certainly is not an answer. Not on our part, not on the courts part,” he said.

Advertisement

Expressing its shock, the bench asked if Muslims were also indulging in hate speeches, to which Sibal replied with a question: “If they would, would they be spared?”

Justice Roy said the “statements are indeed disturbing” especially for a democratic country like India which is known to religion-neutral.

However, he pointed out that statements against just one community were brought to the court’s notice, and that the apex court cannot be seen as an institution to target anyone. “These kind of statements by anyone is condemnable,” he said.

The petitioner sought direction to the Centre and state governments to start an independent and impartial probe into the incidents of hate crimes and speeches and to initiate action under Unlawful Activities Prevention Act and other relevant laws against those engaging in the same.

With inputs from Live Law, PTI

First uploaded on: 21-10-2022 at 17:51 IST
Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
shorts
Maguntas
Political PulseUpdated: March 29, 2024 07:11 IST

Away from the national capital’s courtroom where the case against Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal is playing out, two key figures embroiled in the excise policy case – four-time MP Magunta Srinivasulu Reddy and his son Raghava Magunta Reddy – are busy campaigning for BJP ally Telugu Desam Party (TDP)

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
close