Supreme Court Mulls Guidelines On Freedom Of Speech And Expression: ‘Citizens Must Observe Self Regulation’
The Supreme Court on Monday said that citizens must know value of freedom of speech, expression and observe self regulation and restraint, as it mulled guidelines on freedom of speech and expression.
Justices B V Nagarathna and K V Viswanathan were hearing a plea of one Wazahat Khan booked in FIRs in several states for his objectionable posts on X against a Hindu deity.
Khan was granted interim protection from coercive action till July 14. He had also filed a complaint against another social media influencer Sharmistha Panoli for her alleged communal remarks in a video.
“The citizens must know the value of the fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression. The State can step in case of violations… Nobody wants the State to step in (sic),” Justice Nagarathna said.
Clarifying he did not mean censorship, the judge continued that there should be "fraternity among citizens," as it cosidered framing guidelines on freedom of speech and expression for citizens. “All this divisive tendency on social media has to be curbed.”
The SC bench also stressed that the reasonable restrictions under Article 19 (2) of the Constitution on freedom of speech and expression had "rightly been placed".
Kolkata Police arrested Khan on June 9, following which he moved the top court challenging that the FIRs against him were for the old tweets made by him. He also argued that the complaints were filed in retaliation to the complaint he filed against Panoli. "I have deleted all of them and apologised," his counsel told the SC.
SC Says Freedom Of Speech And Expression Being 'Abused'
This comes as the apex court, during the hearing of a cartoonist's plea, noted that the right of freedom of speech and expression was being "abused". The cartoonist is accused of sharing alleged objectionable cartoons of PM Modi and RSS workers on social media.
A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Aravind Kumar asked the counsel of cartoonist Hemant Malviya, seeking anticipatory bail in the matter: "Why do you do all this?"
To this, Advocate Vrinda Grover, representing Malviya, argued: "It may be unpalatable. Let me say it is in poor taste. Let me go to that extent. But is it an offence? My lords have said, it can be offensive but it is not an offence. I am simply on law. I am not trying to justify anything."
However, Justice Dhulia observed that the case involves "abuse" of freedom of speech and expression. "Whatever we may do with this case, but this is definitely the case that the freedom of speech and expression is being abused."
Additional solicitor general K M Nataraj, appearing for Madhya Pradesh, also said "such things" were being done repeatedly. When Grover argued that the matter should be handled with maturity, Natraj said that there was more to the case than maturity alone.
Grover then agreed to delete the post, saying that the matter was over a cartoon made in 2021 during the Covid-19 pandemic. The cartoonist's advocate also said that there had been no problem since the time of the cartoon's inception and highlighted the issue was whether this would require arrest and remand.
The bench has posted the matter for hearing on July 15.
The plea was filed by the cartoonist challenging Madhya Pradesh High Court's July 3 order refusing him anticipatory bail. Malviya was booked in May following a complaint by lawyer and RSS worker Vinay Joshi at the Lasudiya police station in Indore.
In his complaint, Joshi alleged that Malviya disturbed communal harmony, hurt the religious sentiments of Hindus, and tarnished RSS's image by his "objectionable" social media post. The FIR against Malviya includes allegations of inappropriate remarks on Lord Shiva as well as cartoons, photographs, videos, and comments on PM Modi and RSS workers.
(With inputs from news agency PTI.)
india