Allow Mumbai Hindu Janakrosh Morcha only subject to 'no hate speech' guarantee; videograph the event: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Friday ordered that the upcoming Hindu Janakrosh Morcha in Mumbai can be permitted only subject to the condition that no hate speech will be made at the event [Shaheen Abdullah vs Union of India and ors]..A bench of Justices KM Joseph and JB Pardiwala asked the Maharashtra government to ensure the same and also ordered that the event scheduled to be held on February 5, be videographed."We record the submission of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta that if permission is applied for Sakaal Hindu Samaj for holding the apprehended meeting on 5.2.2023, and if permission is granted, it will be subject to condition that nobody will make any hate speech in defiance of law and in violation of public order," the Court ordered.Pertinently, Justice Joseph remarked that the top court cannot allow a 'replica' of the Dharam Sansads in Uttarakhand where hate speeches targeting Muslim community were made..The top court was hearing an application against the continuance of hate speech rallies, particularly a Hindu Janakrosh Morcha proposed to be conducted in Mumbai later this month.The plea contended that several events and rallies have taken place across Maharashtra calling for an economic and social boycott of the Muslim community, and levelling allegations of "land jihad" and "love jihad" to criminalise the entire community.Such mass rallies, which also feature children participating, are being organised with the consent and knowledge of the government, the applicant alleged.Further, one such rally was organised by the 'Sakal Hindu Samaj', an umbrella body of Hindu right-wing organisations, under the banner 'Hindu Janakrosh Sabha'.In one such Morcha organised in Mumbai on January 29, 2023, over 10,000 people attended, the applicant submitted. The same rally also featured open calls to kill Muslims by a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Member of the Legislative Assembly, T Raja Singh, the application noted.The plea, therefore, sought a direction to halt such rallies and speeches intended to incite communal disharmony..During the hearing of the matter, the bench remarked that the Central government has to ensure hate speech does not occur. Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, appearing for Maharashtra, vehemently opposed the plea but conceded that permission to hold the meeting in question has not been granted yet."When a secular state does this then freedom of speech petitions will flood the country. If someone is prevented to voice their view then there will be prevention of Article 19(1)(a) ...barring law and order situation ... The court has to be very careful in a pre-censorship order," he said.Justice Pardiwala then replied,"We may be reluctant to grant a relief that this procession is not held. But it should be ensured that during this rally no rash statements are made and steps are taken and vigil is kept."The SG questioned how a Kerala-based petitioner could know of speeches being made in Maharashtra.He also said that the top court cannot rule that what is to be spoken has to be first vetted. To Justice Joseph responded saying,"See what happened in Uttarakhand and then State took action. If there is a replica of what happened then we cannot allow this. Please read what is written." The SG then admitted that the remarks made in earlier iterations of the event were distasteful, but said action will be taken against hate speech. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appearing for the petitioners then pointed out that only last Sunday hate-filled statements were made by an MLA, and the same organisers are holding another event."They not only want pre-censorship but also pre-arrest," the SG quipped, adding that the petitioner was absuing the jurisdiction of the Court and was being selective. .Mehta also cautioned against any interim relief, stating,"Your lordships would be pre-judging if you say this. This forum is being misused. We are also not expressing many things." Justice Joseph then reminded the SG of the top court's role, and in the context of the petitioner, said,"This is because we are the only constitutional forum." "In case permission is granted and in case power under Section 151 CrPC is invoked, it will be the duty of the police to invoke the power and act under the mandate of the section," the bench ordered.SG Mehta then assured the bench that a statement will be filed as to what had transpired at the event on January 29..[Read order]