There can't be any compromise on hate speech: Apex court

New Delhi, February 6

The Supreme Court on Monday observed that there is a growing consensus around hate speech and stressed there is no scope for hate crimes on the basis of religion in a secular country such as India.

Dangerous atmosphere

When action is not taken against hate crime, then an atmosphere is fostered which is very dangerous and it has to be rooted out from our lives. There cannot be any compromise on hate speech at all. Supreme Court Bench

“There cannot be any compromise on hate speech at all,” the top court said and added that it is only if the state acknowledges the problem of hate speech that a solution could be found.

It also said that it is the primary duty of the state to protect its citizens from any such hate crimes.

A Bench of Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna said, “When action is not taken against hate crimes, then an atmosphere is fostered which is very dangerous and it has to be rooted out from our lives. There cannot be any compromise on hate speech at all.”

The top court was hearing a plea of a Muslim man who has alleged that he was assaulted and abused in the name of religion on July 4, 2021, by a “screwdriver gang” of criminals as he had boarded a car to go to Aligarh from Noida and that the police has not bothered to register any complaint of hate crime.

The Bench told Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, appearing for the UP Government, that, “nowadays, there is a growing consensus around hate speech. There is no scope for hate crimes in the name of religion in a secular country like India. It has to be rooted out and it is the primary duty of the state to protect its citizens from any such crimes.”

“If a person comes to the police and says that I was wearing a cap and my beard was pulled and abused in the name of religion and still no complaint is registered, then it is a problem,” it said.

Justice Joseph said action of every state officer augments respect for the law. Otherwise, everyone will take the law into their own hands, he said. The Bench, which sat till 6 pm hearing the matter, said, “Will you not acknowledge that there is a hate crime and you will sweep it under the carpet? We are not saying anything adverse. We are only expressing our anguish. That is all.”

Senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, appearing for the petitioner Kazeem Ahmad Sherwani, said it was on January 13 that this court had asked the state government to produce the case diary that police had registered the FIR after two years and that too with all bailable offences barring one.