"Not Inclined To Monitor Every Incident Of Hate Speech": Supreme Court

The Supreme Court said on Tuesday that it is not inclined to either legislate or monitor every incident of hate speech across the country, as legislative measures, police stations, and high courts are already in place.

The observations came from a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta that was hearing an application raising the issue of alleged calls for the social and economic boycott of a particular community.

"We are not legislating in the garb of this petition. Rest assured, we are not inclined to either legislate or monitor every small incident which takes place in X, Y, Z pocket of this country. There are high courts, there are police stations, there are legislative measures. They are already in place," the bench said.

The top court had initially asked the applicant to move the high court concerned with his grievance.

"How can this court continue to monitor all such instances all over the country? You approach the authorities. Let them take action; otherwise, go to the high court," the bench told the counsel appearing in the matter for the applicant.

The lawyer said they have filed an application in a pending writ petition that has raised the issue of hate speech.

"I have filed an application for directions, bringing some additional instances to the knowledge of the court of these calls for the economic boycott that has started," he said.

When the bench observed that such calls were made by certain individuals, the lawyer said some public representatives are also issuing similar calls.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who was present in the court, said public interest cannot be selective to one particular religion.

"There are severe hate speeches going on amongst all religions. I will supply those details to my friend (applicant). Let him add that and espouse that public cause on a pan-religion basis," he said.

The applicant's counsel said he has brought the matter to the court's notice as the authorities are not taking any action.

He argued that in the hate speech matter, the top court had earlier said that if no action was taken by the State, then suo-motu action was to be taken by the police, failing which contempt proceedings would be initiated.

He said the solicitor general can bring this to the notice of the states so that appropriate action can be taken on hate speech.

"No one can be indulging in hate speech -- that is my stand. But while complaining, a public-spirited person cannot be selective," Mehta said.

The bench told the applicant's counsel that there are mechanisms in place and he could take recourse to whatever the law provides.

"Whichever state you have a problem, you approach the jurisdictional high court for appropriate relief," it said.

The bench said the high courts would take care of the matter if public interest is involved.

The applicant's counsel referred to an October 2022 order of the apex court that had asked three states to crack down hard on those making hate speeches.

He also referred to another application filed in the matter concerning a minister in Assam, "speaking about the Bihar election and saying Bihar has approved gobi (cauliflower) farming".

The applicant's counsel claimed that it was in apparent reference to the 1989 Bhagalpur violence, in which several members of the minority community were killed and buried in fields.

The bench said all these matters would be heard on December 9. 

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)