Supreme Court Directs Authorities To Ensure No Hate Speech Takes Place In Rallies Of BJP MLA T Raja Singh, Hindu Janajagruti Samiti

The Supreme Court on Wednesday (January 17) directed the district magistrates at Yavatmal, Maharashtra and Raipur, Chhattisgarh to take 'appropriate steps' after concerns were raised over potential hate speeches at rallies planned by Hindu Janajagruti Samiti and Bharatiya Janata Party legislator T Raja Singh later this week. While declining to stop the rallies, the Court directed the District Magistrates to ensure that no incitement to violence or hate speech takes place in the rallies to be held by BJP MLA T Raja Singh. Police were asked to install CCTV cameras with recording facilities at the locations if felt necessary, so that perpetrators can be identified if anything untoward happens.A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta was hearing an interlocutory application seeking to direct the authorities to refuse permission for the rallies proposed by Hindu Janajagruti Samiti and Bharatiya Janata Party at Yavatmal (on January 18) and Raipur(from January 19 to Jan 25) respectively. The application, filed in a batch of writ petitions seeking directions, included the transcripts of certain alleged speeches made by the organisation and Raja Singh inciting hatred against the Muslim community.During the hearing today, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing on behalf of applicant Shaheen Abdullah, remonstrated against an alleged lack of action against T Raja, who has courted controversy in the past for his provocative speeches. Urging the court to immediately intervene, the senior counsel argued that the lodging of first information reports (FIR) against the BJP legislative assembly member was not deterring him from continuing to deliver alleged hate speeches. He said, "When the event takes place, we come to this court and an FIR is lodged. But nothing is done. Then he continues with this kind of speeches. What is the point of all this then? See the kind of hatred he is propagating!""I went through [the speeches]. Certainly objectionable," Justice Khanna admitted, even as he expressed his disinclination to grant judicial relief at this stage once the criminal justice machinery has been set into motion by filing of an FIR. When Sibal repeated that no substantive action has been taken against the alleged perpetrator despite the FIR, Justice Khanna said -"This court has already issued directions, including regarding CCTV cameras. As far as processions are concerned...we are not going to stop that. If there's any hate speech or incitement to violence, we will take action. But we cannot preempt that."Pointing to the principles of natural justice, Justice Datta exclaimed, "Is he a party? Your request, if granted, will affect someone. Your prayer is to ensure that permission is not granted to X or withdraw permission if already granted? How can we pass this order without this person being a party or hearing them? This goes against the fundamental principles of natural justice.""What about the fundamentals of our Constitution?" Sibal countered.The bench ultimately directed the district magistrates of the locations where processions are planned to be taken out by Hindu Janajagruti Samiti and T Raja Singh to 'take notice' of the allegations and the police to install CCTV cameras with recording facilities if deemed necessary. The order reads -"It is to be noted that persons against whom allegations have been made have not been impleaded as parties. Nevertheless in view of the assertions made, we require the authorities to be cautious of the fact that no incitement to violence or hate speech can be permitted. We accordingly direct the district magistrate of Yavatmal, Maharashtra and Raipur, Chhattisgarh to take notice of the allegations and take appropriate steps as may be advised and required. If necessary and deemed appropriate, the police will install CCTV cameras with recording facilities so that perpetrators can be identified if any event happens.""This will happen again and again unless Your Lordships intervene," Sibal said at the end. Justice Khanna replied, "We have passed orders. In one case, we had passed orders and it did stop. That is the positive part. Why only look at the negative aspect?"On earlier occasions, the top court, while normally declining to deal with individual cases of hate speech, has advocated for 'practical and effective' steps and a broad machinery to deal with the problem as a whole. For instance, in August, after stressing the need for stakeholders to collaborate to find an enduring out-of-court solution to the problem of hate speech on an earlier occasion, the court suggested the formation of a committee by the district police chief that would assess both the content and veracity of hate speech complaints and issue appropriate directions to the investigating officer or the chief of the jurisdictional police station. This committee would meet within specified timelines when they are apprised of any instance of hate speech and also periodically review the progress in all ongoing...

Supreme Court Directs Authorities To Ensure No Hate Speech Takes Place In Rallies Of BJP MLA T Raja Singh, Hindu Janajagruti Samiti

Awstika Das

Tags