Supreme Court Dismisses Plea To Curb "Brahmophobia" & Hate Speech Against Brahmin Community

The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a writ petition seeking recognition of hate speech targeting the Brahmin community, described as “Brahmophobia,” as a punishable form of caste-based discrimination.

A bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan initially dismissed the plea after briefly hearing petitioner Mahalingam Balaji, who appeared in person. The petitioner later mentioned the matter, seeking permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to approach the appropriate forum.

Ultimately, the Court allowed him to withdraw the plea with the final order, "The petitioner who has appeared in person has sought permission to withdraw this petition. His submission is placed on record. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn."

During the hearing, Justice Nagarathna said that there shouldn't be hate speech against any community and emphasised that concerns about such issues could be addressed by following fraternity.

“We don't want hate speech against any community. It depends on education, intellectual development, tolerance, and patience. Once everyone follows fraternity, automatically there will be no hate speech.”

In his petition, Balaji sought directions to Union and State governments to officially recognise hate speech targeting the Brahmin community, which he described as “Brahmophobia” as a punishable form of caste-based discrimination and to take prompt legal action against such instances in mainstream and social media.

He also sought a comprehensive investigation by central and state agencies into alleged coordinated domestic or foreign campaigns aimed at inciting caste conflict or promoting targeted hatred or genocide against the Brahmin community.

He further sought directions to the Union Government to constitute a high-level truth and justice commission to “investigate and acknowledge the 1948 Mahrashtra Brahmin Genocide and the 1990 Kashmiri Pandit Genocide; and to recommend measures for rehabilitative, enonomic, and educational support to surviors and their descendants.”

The petition also sought directions for the inclusion of “appropriate chapters on Maharashtra Brahmin Genocide, 1984 Sikh Genocide and 1990 Kashmir Pandit Genocide”, in NCERT and State board textbooks, establishment of publicly funded memorial museums, and declaration of January 19 as “Genocide Victims Solidarity Day.”

The petitioner also sought directions to disqualify any public servant or constitutional office holder found indulging in caste-based hate speech against Brahmins and require NGOs to adopt a code of conduct prohibiting such hate speech.

He sought directions to NCERT to remove “misleading assertions portraying Brahmins negatively”, and require the Union Government to produce a white paper on hate and discrimination issues faced by Brahmins and action taken to address them. He also sought a pledge to never again allow Genocide and ethnic cleansing to happen in the country and promote communal harmony.

During the hearing, Balaji submitted that the issue concerned targeted hate speech and selective application of hate speech laws. He claimed that there were coordinated campaigns against Brahmins, including foreign involvement. He further contended that there is genocide denial with respect to the Kashmiri Pandit exodus of 1990.

Justice Nagarathna questioned why a particular community should seek protection against hate speech against themselves only. She emphasised that no one should indulge in hate speech.

The Court remarked that the concerns of the petitioner could be taken up before appropriate forums, but not the judiciary. The Court observed that efforts must be made to promote fraternity and social awareness. On petitioner's remark that the judiciary is also targeted, the court remarked that it is not concerned about false attacks on judiciary.

Previously also, Justice Nagarathna has emphasised the importance of cultivating fraternity in order to curb hate speech.

Case no. – Diary No. 69172 / 2025

Case Title – Mahalingam Balaji v. Union of India

Related- Supreme Court Disposes Plea Against Netflix Film 'Ghooskhor Pandat' After Director Agrees To Change Name