The Supreme Court on Friday once again came down heavily on authorities for failing to take action against the growing menace of hate speech. Asserting that the Constitution of India envisages a secular nation, the apex court warned any delay on the part of the administration in taking action on this “very serious issue” will invite the court’s contempt.
A bench of Justices KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy issued notices to Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand Governments on the petition filed by journalist Shaheen Abdullah and directed them to promptly register criminal cases against the culprits without waiting for a complaint to be filed.
“The Constitution of India envisages a secular nation and fraternity among citizens assuring the dignity of the individual...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.
The apex court said action must be taken against those making hate speeches irrespective of their religion to preserve the secular fabric of the nation. “Respondents 2-4 (the three States) will file a response as to what action has been taken for the speeches highlighted. They shall ensure that as and when any (hate) speech or action takes place, suo motu action is taken in such cases in future without waiting for complaints”.
Noting that the complaint has said that the authorities are not taking action against hate crimes was serious, the bench issued notice on the petition. The bench said that the complaint of the petitioner relates to the “prevailing climate of hate in the country” and total inaction of the authorities.
“The Constitution of India envisages Bharat as a secular nation and fraternity, assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the country are guiding principles enshrined in the preamble. There cannot be fraternity unless members of the community drawn from different religions or castes are able to live in harmony,” the bench observed in the order.
“Respondents will issue directions to their subordinates for appropriate action and such action will be taken irrespective of religion against the person who delivers such hate speech so that the secular character of this country as envisaged in the preamble is maintained,” it said. Abdullah has moved the top court also seeking direction to the Centre and States to initiate independent, credible and impartial probe into the incidents of hate crimes and hate speeches across the country.
In his petition, Abdullah has also sought to invoke the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and other stringent provisions to curb hate crimes and hate speeches.
He has alleged the Muslim community is being “targeted and terrorised” by the participation of members of the ruling political party in delivering hate speeches.
“The spread of hate towards Muslims and other minorities gets accelerated and becomes all the more far-reaching in its impact as a result of the support, directly or indirectly, extended to radical
miscreants, who engage in acts of hate crimes, physical violence as well as communally charged speeches by the ruling political party,” he has said in the petition.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Abdullah, referred to a recent incident of hate speech in Delhi. When the top court asked if Muslims also make such hate speeches, Sibal said action should be taken against all who make hate speeches and they (Muslims) should also not be spared.