Communalism

HC seeks affidavit from state on steps it takes against hate speech
Swati Deshpande / TNN / Updated: Feb 11, 2024  https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/hc-seeks-affidavit-from-state-on-steps-it-takes-against-hate-speech/articleshow/107592900.cms

One Shakir Tamboli had filed a plea seeking that the HC direct state govt "to take immediate action" on two FIRs and "prosecute and arrest Pawaskar, and if required transfer the probe to a court-monitored special investigation team".

On Friday, senior counsel Mihir Desai and advocate Lara Jesani, for Tamboli, submitted that police had taken no immediate steps to arrest Pawaskar despite two incidents of alleged hate speeches by him in Sangli's Vita and Islampur too.

Bombay HC has questioned state government on the adequacy of action taken on a plea seeking the arrest of BJP leader Vikram Pawaskar for his alleged role in an attack on a mosque in Satara last September. On Friday, senior counsel Mihir Desai and advocate Lara Jesani, for Shakir Tamboli, had submitted before the court that Pawaskar was also involved in two incidents of hate speeches on Jan 24 and June 2 last year in Sangli district, but no immediate steps had been taken to arrest him.

Police had done videography and registered an FIR. Advocate Abhinav Chandrachud, for Pawaskar, sought to intervene, saying the plea was making demands that affect his client’s rights and that he was not made a party to the petition.
Since no written application for intervention was made, the HC did not consider the plea at this stage. The court asked the state several questions on its inaction regarding the two FIRs in Sangli. The government, through public prosecutor Hiten Venegaonkar, submitted one affidavit regarding the Satara case and sought time to file another on the Sangli cases and said police were following the necessary process in taking action.
The court will hear the matter next on March 5. Jesani had submitted last month too that the case on the Jan 24 incident was registered only on May 11, 2023, after several representations were made to police. She argued that police flouted guidelines mentioned in a Jan 13, 2023, Supreme Court order on steps to be taken in cases of hate speech.
In the Jan 19 order, the HC recorded Jesani’s submission which, on Aug 21, 2023, said, “One mosque was vandalised and people were lynched and one person died” and several others were injured. “According to the counsel for the petitioner, one Vikram Pawaskar had incited/ instigated Sangram Mane and others to vandalise the mosque and to fuel communal violence.
She submits that the police have arrested only Sangram Mane, in whose house the alleged conspiracy took place. However, they have not taken any steps vis–a–vis Pawaskar,” the HC order read. On Jan 19, Venegaonkar had stated before the HC that he would “speak to the superior authorities, and if required, appropriate steps would be taken to protect such persons including the petitioner.”

https://thewire.in/communalism/ramesh-bidhuri-has-exposed-the-real-face-of-the-bjp-beyond-pr-charm-offensives-studied-silenes 

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP from South Delhi, Ramesh Bidhuri, called a fellow MP, Danish Ali, ‘pimp’, ‘terrorist’, ‘militant’ and also us ed the words mullah and katwa – a pejorative word for a Muslim who is circumcised. The abuse was hurled across the floor of parliament. Bidhuri also demanded that Ali be thrown out of parliament. Sitting next to Bidhuri were two senior BJP leaders, Harsh Vardhan, former minister of health and also science and technology, and Ravi Shankar Prasad, former minister of law and justice and communications and information technology. Both of these senior members of the BJP were laughing throughout Bidhuri’s rant. Subsequently, the speaker of parliament, Om Prakash Birla, warned Bidhuri that such behaviour would lead to penalties in the future and he also expunged the abusive comments. The BJP has issued a show cause notice to Bidhuri but it remains to be seen if any action will be taken.

by Ali Khan Mahmudabad

23/09/2023

@ZuberMedia Hadapsar, 10 sep 2023  https://twitter.com/zubermedia/status/1701620141694558618?s=12&t=Esqni9aaHAq3vKp_y4THgw 

video: https://twitter.com/i/status/1701620141694558618 सकल हिंदू समाज ने एक और नफरती रैली का आयोजन किया पुणे(महाराष्ट्र) में, जहां भाजपा के पूर्व विधायक और ओबीसी सेल के अध्यक्ष @iYogeshTilekar (मा आमदार, हडपसर विधानसभा । युवा मोर्चा अध्यक्ष, भाजपा, महाराष्ट्र प्रदेश (२०१५-२०२०)। ओबीसी मोर्चा अध्यक्ष, भाजपा, महाराष्ट्र प्रदेश (२०२०-२०२३)) ने मुसलमानों के खिलाफ साजिश पेश करते हुए #नफरत भरा भाषण दिया।  Love jihad, Conversions,

It is time for the executive arm of the government as well as the political governance structures to display sagacity and shout out that enough is enough and put a stop to recurring incidents of hate speech.

https://thewire.in/rights/india-hate-speech-violence 

An abridged version of Justice Madan B. Lokur and Shruti Narayan’s chapter in the anthology Religion, Hateful Expression and Violence is published here with the permission of the Torkel Opsahl Academic EPublisher (TOAEP).

The Supreme Court’s most recent judgment considering the issue of hate speech is Amish Devgan v. Union of India (‘Amish Devgan’). Devgan, a television journalist, faced criminal charges under various provisions of the IPC. The charges were filed after he referred to a saint in Islám as an “invader, terrorist and robber who had come to India to convert its population to Islam”, during a TV programme hosted by him. The Court refused to quash the criminal cases, which is an affirmation of the adequacy of existing criminal law to recognize hate speech, even if made accidentally or in error, as was claimed by Devgan. In its rather lengthy judgment, the Court embarked on a comprehensive review of Indian and foreign decisions on hate speech while referring to some helpful academic articles.

The judiciary too should be alive to the consequence of hate speech not being punished suitably and in time. It is often said that ‘delay defeats justice’. But what is more problematic with delay in punishing hate speech is not that justice is denied, but that freedoms in a free society get compromised or corroded to the detriment of targeted individuals, groups or communities. The Supreme Court appears to have taken notice of the urgency of policing hate speech. In a petition seeking redress against the proliferation of hate speech, the Court in October 2022 directed three state police forces to take immediate action to register cases against any incidents of hate speech in their jurisdictions, “even if no complaint is forthcoming”. The Court extended its order to all states in April 2023. It remains to be seen, however, whether state authorities use this order to prosecute genuine cases of hate speech. 

Madan B. Lokur and Shruti Narayan

02/09/2023