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

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 cases.

The bench also sought responses from the state government on the status of their compliance with the Tehseen Poonawalla guideline requiring the establishment of district-level nodal officers. As per the Centre's status report, the states which informed that they have appointed nodal officers are : Andhra Pradesh, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Chhattisgarh, Delhi, Goa, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Jharkhand, Karnataka, UT of Ladakh, Lakshadweep, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Odisha, Puducherry, Punjab, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Telangana, Tripura, Uttarakhand and Uttar Pradesh.

After the standing counsel for the West Bengal government orally told the bench that the state has complied with the judgment, the court issued notice to the States of Gujarat, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Nagaland to determine if they have appointed nodal officers in terms of the 2018 judgment in the Tehseen Poonawalla case to deal with hate crimes and mob violence.

In Tehseen Poonawalla, the Court directed that state governments shall designate, a senior police officer, not below the rank of Superintendent of Police, as nodal officer in each district. Such nodal officer shall be assisted by one of the DSP rank officers in the district for taking measures to prevent incidents of mob violence and lynching. They shall constitute a special task force so as to procure intelligence reports about the people who are likely to commit such crimes or who are involved in spreading hate speeches, provocative statements and fake news.

The nodal, so designated, shall hold regular meetings (at least once a month) with the local intelligence units in the district along with all Station House Officers of the district so as to identify the existence of the tendencies of vigilantism, mob violence or lynching in the district and take steps to prohibit instances of dissemination of offensive material through different social media platforms or any other means for inciting such tendencies. The Nodal Officer shall also make efforts to eradicate hostile environment against any community or caste which is targeted in such incidents.

The Nodal Officers shall bring to the notice of the DGP any inter-district co-ordination issues for devising a strategy to tackle lynching and mob violence related issues at the State level.