'Word 'Kathmul**h' No Hate Speech; Justice Shekhar Yadav Spoke As A Hindu At VHP Event': PIL In Allahabad HC Against RS Impeachment Motion

The PIL plea, moved by Advocate Ashok Pandey, prays for a direction to the Chairman of Rajya Sabha not to act upon the motion moved by Kapil Sibal and 54 other MPs against Justice Shekher Kumar Yadav.

The PIL plea argues that whatever Justice Yadav has said, he said it in the capacity of a Hindu on the topics that are connected to the hearts of Hindus as they are affecting their day-to-day life.

It adds that the participants of this meeting were only Hindus, and as such, the words spoken in that meeting can't come in the definition of hate speech given in some public meetings.

The PIL plea further states that the word 'Kathmu**ah' uttered by Justice Yadav during his speech doesn't come under the purview of Hate speech. It argues that he was merely expressing his opinion, possibly as an individual whose relatives or friends have suffered cruelty and torture, both mental and physical, due to 'Kathamu**apan'.

“He may be a person whose some of relation or friends have faced torcher due to some incidents of love jehad. He may be a sensitive person who is aggrieved with the legal permission to the Muslims to marry as many as ladies they want without attraction of any penal or civil consequence, he may be a person who moves on the road with open eyes and see the girl child aged even five to six years going to school with hizab. As an advocate and the judge he might have got the information that how the Kathamu**apan is stopping the muslim girls from going to school and college or how the Muslim ladies are being compelled to wear Hizab and Burka by Kathamu**a's. ”

Furthermore, the PIL plea submits that the right to speech and expression, which is a fundamental right guaranteed by Article 19 of the Constitution, is available to the judges also, and so, some speech made by the judge outside the courtroom cannot be ground to remove a judge from his office.

It argues that it is a clear case of misuse of the position by the MPs moving the motion, so apart from rejecting the motion, the MPs should also be warned not to do so in future.

“Such a warning is required as the leader of this group means Sri Kapil Sibal is in habit of dictating terms to the judges and those who don't follow it, motion to remove them is moved,” the plea submits.

It adds that the application before the RS does not describe how the words spoken by Justice Yadav in the meeting with some persons of the Dharm to which he belongs will come into the definition of proven misbehaviour or incapacity.

“…in case the words spoken by Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav comes under the definition of the Hate Speech then the FIR can be lodged against him but it can not be ground to remove him from the office of judge. The judge can be removed on the ground of proven misbehavior or incapacity as such judge which is missing from the case in hand and so the motion impugned needs to be rejected,” the plea contends.

Also read : From Believing 'Cow Exhales Oxygen' To Praising PM : A Look At Justice Shekhar Yadav's Controversial Remarks