NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed its reluctance to take cognisance and interfere in cases of hate speeches brought before it from every nook and corner of the country, and said the aggrieved person should instead approach police or the concerned high court to raise their grievances.While hearing an application pertaining to alleged calls made by lawmakers of various states for the social and economic boycott of a particular community, a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta said it was not possible for the apex court to entertain every such incident. The bench said SC had already passed the order and it was for police to take action as per law.”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 HC,” the bench said.Advocate Nizam Pasha, appearing for journalist Qurban Ali, submitted that the state authorities were not taking action and the apex court order was being violated with impunity. He said the top court had itself passed an order directing that suo-motu action must be taken by police in case of hate speech, failing which contempt proceedings would be initiated.Opposing the plea, solicitor general Tushar Mehta submitted that only instances of hate speeches against a particular community are brought before the court and not all hate speech cases. He also questioned the motive behind the application. “No one can indulge in hate speech – that is my stand. But while complaining, a public spirited person cannot be selective,” Mehta said.But Pasha said hate speeches calling for social and economic boycott were made by MLAs and various organisations. He told the court an Assam minister made a controversial remark on “gobi farming” after the Bihar assembly poll result which allegedly referred to a gory incident during the 1989 Bhagalpur riots.”It is submitted that a call for boycott whether made by a public authority or a private citizen is in violation of Article 15 of the Constitution, particularly when the said boycott is based solely on religious grounds. It is pertinent to note that such calls for boycott based solely on religion are a threat to national unity and integrity and are also blot on the idea of India as envisioned by framers of our Constitution. The said instances of banishment have remained unchecked by the state authorities despite being duty bound to protect all the citizens of this country. It is further submitted that the major brunt of this gross discrimination is borne by the lowest income groups,” the application said.The court, after a brief hearing, directed that the applications will be heard along with the main case and posted it for next month.Last month, the court had agreed to hear an application filed by former Patna HC judge Anjana Prakash and journalist Qurban Ali who brought to the court’s notice a video circulated by Assam BJP in support of its claim that Muslims would take over the state if BJP goes out of office.End of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosKejriwal, Mann Pay Homage to Ninth Sikh Guru on 350th Martyrdom DayYogi Adityanath Uncovers The Dark Truth Of Mughal’S Tyranny On Shaheedi DiwasIndia Entering ‘Golden Era’ Of Defence Innovation And Self-Reliance: Rajnath Singh‘Until Brahmin Donates His Daughter’: IAS Officer’S Remark Sparks Row, Issues Clarification’A Nation That Never Bows to Terror, Operation Sindoor Shows New India’s Resolve, Says PM ModiChina Rejects Charge of Harassing Indian Woman in Shanghai, But Insists Claim Over Arunachal PradeshMamata Banerjee Warns BJP With Nation-Shaking Threat As SIR Battle Erupts In Bengal Ahead Of PollsAssam CM Calls Zubeen Garg’S Death ‘Plain Murder’, Drops Explosive RevelationDrone Show Pays Homage To Guru Tegh Bahadur In 350th Martyrdom Anniversary Event At Anandpur SahibRed Fort Attack May Derail Benjamin Netanyahu’s India Visit As Israeli Media Flags Safety Concerns123Photostories5 electric blue animals that seem to be painted with ocean water6 factors that are essential to balance blood sugar naturallyThe most viral MET Gala moments you almost forgot10 phrases your child should avoid saying and what to teach them insteadExclusive – Bigg Boss 19: From opening up about her relationship with Kumar Sanu to calling Malti Chahar a ‘lesbian’; Kunickaa Sadanand breaks silence on her journey5 celebrity looks of the day that are setting major fashion goalsMrs. Gump’s most inspiring life lessons from Forrest Gump that still inspire generations8 modern-sounding baby boy names in Sanskrit and their meaningWinter-Friendly Fruits: 8 plants that thrives in cold-weather gardensFrom ‘Dhurandhar’ to ‘Kill Dil’: Moments when Ranveer Singh ruled action on screen123Hot PicksDelhi AQI TodayNew Labour CodeCyclone SenyarGold rate todaySilver rate todayPublic Holidays NovemberBank Holidays NovemberTop TrendingEthiopian Volcanic EruptionVaishno Devi College AdmissionsNHL RumorsJoe Thornton Net WorthStem OPT ExtensionMLB Trade RumorsSmriti Mandhana EducationAsha Jadeja MotwaniTyson FuryTrump Gold Card
NEW DELHI: Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed its reluctance to take cognisance and interfere in cases of hate speeches brought before it from every nook and corner of the country, and said the aggrieved person should instead approach police or the concerned high court to raise their grievances.While hearing an application pertaining to alleged calls made by lawmakers of various states for the social and economic boycott of a particular community, a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta said it was not possible for the apex court to entertain every such incident. The bench said SC had already passed the order and it was for police to take action as per law.“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 HC,” the bench said.Advocate Nizam Pasha, appearing for journalist Qurban Ali, submitted that the state authorities were not taking action and the apex court order was being violated with impunity. He said the top court had itself passed an order directing that suo-motu action must be taken by police in case of hate speech, failing which contempt proceedings would be initiated.Opposing the plea, solicitor general Tushar Mehta submitted that only instances of hate speeches against a particular community are brought before the court and not all hate speech cases. He also questioned the motive behind the application. “No one can indulge in hate speech – that is my stand. But while complaining, a public spirited person cannot be selective,” Mehta said.But Pasha said hate speeches calling for social and economic boycott were made by MLAs and various organisations. He told the court an Assam minister made a controversial remark on “gobi farming” after the Bihar assembly poll result which allegedly referred to a gory incident during the 1989 Bhagalpur riots.“It is submitted that a call for boycott whether made by a public authority or a private citizen is in violation of Article 15 of the Constitution, particularly when the said boycott is based solely on religious grounds. It is pertinent to note that such calls for boycott based solely on religion are a threat to national unity and integrity and are also blot on the idea of India as envisioned by framers of our Constitution. The said instances of banishment have remained unchecked by the state authorities despite being duty bound to protect all the citizens of this country. It is further submitted that the major brunt of this gross discrimination is borne by the lowest income groups,” the application said.The court, after a brief hearing, directed that the applications will be heard along with the main case and posted it for next month.Last month, the court had agreed to hear an application filed by former Patna HC judge Anjana Prakash and journalist Qurban Ali who brought to the court’s notice a video circulated by Assam BJP in support of its claim that Muslims would take over the state if BJP goes out of office.
