Thread by @LiveLawIndia

#SupremeCourt to hear shortly a batch of petitions in relation to hate speech crimes.

On last occasion, the bench had sought a response from the State of Maharashtra on a contempt petition filed alleging failure to take action against hate speeches.

#SupremeCourtOfIndia

Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay : On last occasion, your lordship had agreed to decide the larger issue (to define hate speech crimes).

Justice KM Joseph : My last working day is 19th May. Don't know if I will be in a position to decide.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Justice KM Joseph : What has happened to the contempt? That is the main issue now.

ASG SV Raju for Maharashtra : We have filed the response.

J KM Joseph : What have you said?

ASG : There is compliance.

ASG : We have identified some cases and FIR registered..videography was limited to rally proposed on Feb 5th, that rally did not take place.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

ASG : Even in cases which the petitioners have not pointed out, we have registered FIR.

Justice Joseph : That is your duty.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Senior Adv Sanjay Parikh for petitioner : After 5th Feb, several rallies took place. And there are some individuals who are repeatedly making statements, but no action taken.

Justice Nagarathna : That is why we said, don't start from apex court. There is a structure.

Justice Joseph : We did not direct that action should be taken against Hindu community or Muslim community. What we said was irrespective of the religion, action should be taken.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Petitioner's counsel : By and large, we are very tolerant.

Justice Joseph : It is only some elements.
#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Solicitor General : No one, from Central Govt or State Govts, justify hate speeches. If hate speeches take place, what is to be done is given in Tehseen Poonawalla judgment.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Justice Joseph : It is an offence affecting the fabric of the nation.

SG : It is a serious offence, no doubt. Whenever hate speech take place, remedy is to approach the concerned police station. If police refuse, invoke 156(3) to approach Magistrate.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

SG : What is happening is..one petition is filed, targeting one community...

Justice Joseph : We are very clear, irrespective of religion.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

SG : In one petition court has issued notice. Now we are receiving applications after applications. Should this court be taking over the duty of the Magistrate? There is a remedy. You can't rush here. Now from all over country, applications are coming here.
#HateSpeech

Parikh : In some states, for example, Maharashtra, nobody is taking action. I don't want to name the person. Despite Supreme Court's order, no action is being taken. The statements are shocking. There are MPs and MLAs sitting in those meetings.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

SG : Kindly post this matter for hearing on this point, whether this court should take action.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Adv Kaleeswaram Raj refers to Justice Nagarathna's judgment in Kaushal Kishore.

'When there is executive failure, what is to be done. This is not a singular case. This is a phenomena happening in the country'.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

SG : What should be done by this Court? Kindly post it for hearing on that point.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Petitioner's counsel : This is a pan-India issue.

Justice Joseph : When you say it is a pan-India issue, you take the case of north-east. I don't know if there are instances of hate speeches there, not that I know.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Justice Joseph : So we don't know if it is pan-India or it is in some areas for special reasons.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Justice Joseph : We only had public good in mind when we passed the order for suo motu action against hate speech. That it should not go out of hands..

SG : Govt also shares the concerns. But we have now hundreds of applications, where do we draw the line.

Justice Joseph : This is something which goes to the heart of our republic...about dignity of people....

SG : Agree, but now one petitioner files a petition against one community, and then another petition against another comes..should it be done by this court?

Nizam Pasha : Court's order was to police to take suo motu action. And if police is not acting, it will be contempt.
#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Pasha : We have filed another IA on larger issue..

SG : Now IA after IA...this is the problem...

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

One counsel says that an application regarding cases in West Bengal.

SG : West Bengal is a serious issue.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Justice Joseph : When we passed the order, we intended that action should be taken suo motu in future...not for actions of past, from history...

SG : Crime does not become stale.

Another counsel mentions a petition filed against Bihar..

Justice Joseph : We want to say something. Both of us are apolitical. We don't care about party A or party B. We are only on Constitution.

SG : We are absolutely clear on that. No doubt.

Justice Joseph : Don't bring in politics. If attempt is to bring in politics, we won't be a party to this...we have said, irrespective of religion, action should be taken. What more is needed?

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Uttarakhand Deputy AG raises the issue of maintainability of petitions. Says that as per 5-judge bench decision in Lalitakumari case, Magistrate has to be approached first if police refuse to register FIR.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

SG : If Pasha is serious about the case, he should add West Bengal too....Let all states be joined as parties.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Pasha says an application has been made to make the order applicable to all States/UTs.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

The order passed by the Court in October 2022 for suo motu registration of FIR in hate speech cases was passed only against UP, Delhi and Uttarakhand Govts.

livelaw.in/top-stories/ta…

BREAKING| Supreme Court extends the order for suo motu action for FIR in hate speech cases to all States/UTs (the initial order passed in October 2022 was only applicable to UP, Delhi and Uttarakhand).

#SupremeCourt #SupremeCourtofIndia

"immediately, as and when any speech or any action takes place which attracts offences such as Section 153A, 153B, 295A and 506 of IPC etc, without any complaint being filed suo motu action be taken to register cases and proceed against the offenders in accordance with law" -… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

We further make it clear that such action be taken irrespective of the religion of the maker of the speech, so that the secular character of Bharat as envisaged by the Preamble is preserved : Bench states in order.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

Another counsel mentions that linguistic issues also should be taken into account. He says his petition deals with issue of denigration of a language.

Justice Joseph : Which language?

Counsel : Hindi.

#SupremeCourt

Sanjay Parikh for PUCL says that there are reports showing inaction against hate speech in Maharashtra.

Justice Joseph : We are only on the rule of law. We can't be changing people in their minds. That is a sociological or political thing.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Pasha suggests that a nodal officer be appointed in each state who should be responsible for actions on hate speeches.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Justice Joseph says preventive measures have not been adequately explored against hate speech offence.

Preventive detention laws do not make reference to hate speech as a ground for detention, Justice Joseph says.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Kaleeswaram Raj raises concerns about making preventive detention in hate speech cases. Says laws cannot be made more draconian and that there will be misuse.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Justice Joseph to ASG : You (State of Maharashtra) should not take our orders lightly.

ASG : We have highest regard for this court.

Bench now hears the intervention application filed by Adv Vishnu Shankar Jain.

Jain : I have highlighted the calls for beheading made across the country. Beheading of a specific community. This is a very serious incident.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Jain : Beheading calls are continuing in the country. Also appreciate that actual incidents of violence have happened. So some directions are to be made against the calls of beheading.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Justice Joseph : Have you gone to Magistrate?

Jain : No action was taken.

Justice Joseph : Your prayer is to allow the intervention. We have allowed your intervention.

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

ASG says the remedy if police is not registering FIR is to approach Magistrate under 156(3).

#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Justice Joseph says that in applications filed seeking FIR against Anurag Thakur and others for hate speech, Magistrate held that sanction is necessary for FIR and HC also took the view that sanction is needed for 156(3).
#SupremeCourt #HateSpeech

Bench to hear the matters next on May 12.