The FIRs have been registered under sections 153A (promoting enmity between groups on ground of religion etc.), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke) and 506 (criminal intimidation) and other relevant provisions of the IPC. These developments that have taken nearly three months to unfold and only after citizens approached the Bombay High Court.

On February 3, 2024, citizens of Mira Road-Bhayander had lodged a complaint with the local police against MLA Geeta Jan for delivering hate speech. NO FIR was registered. The Citizens for Justice & Peace (CJP) had filed complaints against Rane earlier this year. On April 2, CJP’s complaint to the jurisdictional police at Dongri, Mumbai and Thane flagged the hate speeches of the BJP MLA from Kankavli, Nitish Rane. He had made the incendiary speech in Dongri on February 27 and thereafter in Thane accusing the Muslim Minority — of ‘land jihad’ and threatened to evict them. He said he will burn them in a generator, terming the residents as illegal Bangladeshis. Additionally, he warned the police to take law and order in his own hand if the police did not comply with his directives. Three previous complaints related to hate speech and events in January-February 2024 were filed on February 23 this year. CJP has invoked recent orders of the Supreme Court in the Shaheen Abdullah Case (WP (C) 940/2022) to approach jurisdictional officers and district magistrates (DMs) with these complaints while also ensuring that the Director General of Police is cognisant of these citizens’ actions.

 Today, April 23, Public Prosecutor Hiten Venegavkar also told the Bombay High court that 13 cases have been registered regarding the violence that erupted in Mira Road between January 22 and January 26, 2024. A division bench of Justice Revati Mohite-Dere and Justice Manjusha Deshpande directed the State to file an affidavit on this by June 12, and kept the case for further hearing on June 19. The court was dealing with a writ petition seeking action against MLAs Nitesh Rane, Geeta Jain, and T Raja for allegedly delivering hate speeches and inciting violence.

Senior Advocate Gayatri Singh for the petitioners relied on Amish Devgan v. Union of India and submitted that section 295A should be invoked. Venegavkar said that the investigation has commenced and the Police Commissioners will decide whether section 295A should be invoked.

The court had earlier directed the Mumbai and Mira Bhayander Police Commissioners to review recordings and transcripts of alleged hate speeches by BJP MLAs Nitesh Rane, Geeta Jain, and T Raja and inform the court if FIRs will be registered against them. The court had also directed the police to take necessary preventive action to ensure communal harmony and maintain law and order during the Ram Navami festival on April 17, 2024.

The petition, filed by five residents of Mumbai, highlighted instances of alleged hate speeches delivered by the MLAs in January at various locations, including Mira Road, Govandi, Ghatkopar, and Malvani.

The court had expressed the opinion opined that prima facie; certain offences appeared to have been committed based on the speech transcripts. To ensure impartiality and avoid political pressure, the court instructed the police commissioners to personally examine the videos and transcripts of the speeches.

The petitioners before the High Court also brought to the notice of the court the fact that MLA Nitesh Rane held the press conference at the press room and the office of the Mira-Bhayander Commissioner of Police, on January 23, 2024, to make the alleged hate speech. The court remarked that police premises should not be used for events to maintain the citizens’ trust in the impartiality of the police.

The five petitioners are residents of Mumbai, and two of them are victims of the violence in Mira Road, a satellite city of Mumbai. The petitioners have claimed that they made multiple attempts to get the authorities to take action against the accused for hate speech. However, the police failed to take action.

The petition alleged that the police failed to register FIRs against these individuals, despite clear directives from the Supreme Court mandating suo moto action in such cases to preserve India’s secular character. The petition referred to Supreme Court orders dated October 21, 2022, and January 13, 2023, which instructed all states and union territories to take immediate action against hate speech. The petitioners claim that the inaction of the police, despite several media reports, violates these orders and the rule of law.

The petition detailed several incidents where alleged hate speeches led to unrest and violence in various locations, including Mira Road, Govandi, and Ghatkopar. The petition argues that such speeches could trigger further violence and disrupt the upcoming elections.

The petitioners have sought directions to the police to register FIRs against MLAs Nitesh Rane, Geeta Jain, and T. Raja under sections 153, 153A, 153B, 295A, 504, and 505 of the IPC for allegedly having delivered hate speeches in Mira Road, Govandi, and Ghatkopar on various dates.

Related:

Bombay High Court: Plea seeking FIR against three BJP legislators for delivering hate speeches, highlights inaction by police even after Supreme Court guidelines

Bombay HC directs two police commissioners to personally examine videos of speeches delivered by BJP MLA Nitesh Rana, Geeta Jain and T. Raja Singh

The post FIRs for hate speech registered against BJP MLAs Nitesh Rane and Geeta Jain: Maharashtra Police to Bombay High Court appeared first on SabrangIndia.

As per a report in Bar&Bench, while issuing the direction, the division bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Manjusha Deshpande remarked that it prima facie found from the speech transcript that some offence seemed to have been committed. However, as stated by the bench, in order to avoid any partiality or political pressure, it would be best if the police commissioners personally examine the videos and transcripts of the speeches.

It is essential to highlight here that the same division bench of the Bombay HC had given permission to BJP MLA T.Raja Singh to take out a rally in Mira Road in February after the state police had denied him permission. Justices R.P. Mohite Dere and Manusha Ajay Deshpande had granted permission to Singh to conduct the proposed rally on the conditions that no hate speeches are made and that the event is videotaped by the police so that required action can be taken post the event takes place and suo-moto FIRs can be filed, if necessary. (The details can be read here.)

It is essential to note that the Court also took exception of the press conference held by BJP MLA Nitesh Rane from the police commissioner’s office in Mira-Bhayander. As per the report, the Court found the same to be “unacceptable”.

“Police premises should not be used for such events henceforth. It would lead to deterioration of confidence of citizens in police as also the trust that police are impartial,” the Bench remarked upon the same.

In reference to this, the bench also expressed its displeasure over the conduct of the police by remarking that such FIRs only reduced the police’s reputation, as it gave out a signal that anyone can hold a rally and say anything.

“FIR under Section 188 is just watering down your own authority and reputation. Would the same action be taken if the petitioners come to Azad Maidan (in Mumbai) tomorrow and decide to hold a rally? And why couldn’t the rally be stopped midway if you find that it is happening illegally?”

As per the report of Bar&Bench, Chief Public Prosecutor Hiten Venegaonkar for the State government responded to the question put forth by the court by stating that such cultural rallies, like those held annually on Ram Navami, were difficult to control and manage.

However, the Court directed the police to ensure that no untoward incident happens during the upcoming Ram Navami festival on April 17.

Notably, the petition has been posted for hearing on April 15.

The petition:

The five petitioners who have moved the said plea are residents of Mumbai, including two who were themselves victims of the violence that had taken place in Mira Road on January 22. (Full details can be read here.)

The petition has emphasised upon filing of FIR against the three for allegedly delivering hate speeches by providing in the petition that “if action is not taken against individual like MLA Nitesh Rane, MLA Geeta Jain, and Legislator T. Raja Singh for spreading hate speech and inciting violence, the same may embolden them as well as other political leaders to resort to hate speech and incitement with the sole aim of polarizing the citizens for votes. It is submitted that the same may not only result in widespread violence, but shall also hamper free and fair elections, which are part of the basic structure of the Constitution of India”.

The main contention raised by the petitioners through the writ petition is that the state police had an obligation to file the suo-moto FIRs against those making hate speeches, as had been necessitated by the Supreme Court for India in its October 2022 and January 13 order. In the said orders. Notably, the orders had directed all State and Union Territories to take suo-moto action against hate speeches that are in contravention to the secular character of the country. The bench had directed the police officer to invoke their powers and file cases against those hate speakers without giving any regards to their religion (the details of the said order can be read here).

The petitioners have sought directions to the police to register FIRs against MLAs Nitesh Rane, Geeta Jain, and T. Raja Singh under sections 153, 153A, 153B, 295A, 504, and 505 of the IPC for allegedly having delivered hate speeches in Mira Road, Govandi, and Ghatkopar on various dates.

Further details of the writ petition along with the transcription of the speeches can be read here.

Related:

Bombay High Court: Plea seeking FIR against three BJP legislators for delivering hate speeches, highlights inaction by police even after Supreme Court guidelines

Targeting Muslims in Ramzan: Lynching, assault, harassment mar the holy month in India

Why is the BJP calling the Congress Manifesto 2024 to be an “Imprint of the Muslim League”?

The post Bombay HC directs two police commissioners to personally examine videos of speeches delivered by BJP MLA Nitesh Rana, Geeta Jain and T. Raja Singh appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The five petitioners who have moved the said plea are residents of Mumbai, including two who were themselves victims of the violence that had taken place in Mira Road on January 22. (Full details can be read here.)

The petition has emphasised upon filing of FIR against the aforementioned three for allegedly delivering hate speeches by providing in the petition that “if action is not taken against individual like MLA Nitish Rane, MLA Geeta Jain, and Legislator T. Raja for spreading hate speech and inciting violence, the same may embolden them as well as other political leaders to resort to hate speech and incitement with the sole aim of polarizing the citizens for votes. It is submitted that the same may not only result in widespread violence, but shall also hamper free and fair elections, which are part of the basic structure of the Constitution of India”.

The main contention raised by the petitioners through the said writ petition is that the state police had an obligation to file the suo-moto FIRs against those making hate speeches, as had been necessitated by the Supreme Court for India in its October 2022 and January 13 order. In the said orders. Notably, the said orders had directed all State and Union Territories to take suo-moto action against hate speeches that are in contravention to the secular character of the country. The bench had directed the police officer to invoke their powers and file cases against those hate speakers without giving any regards to their religion (the details of the said order can be read here).

The petition states, “The said orders further state that such action is to be taken irrespective of the religion of the maker of the speech or the person who commits such act, so that the secular character of India is preserved and protected”.

In the petition, it has been highlighted by the petitioners that even after making multiple attempts to get the authorities to take action against the accused for hate speech, no action was taken by the authorities. It is pertinent to provide here that on February 3, over a dozen residents of Mira Road had submitted a written complaint to the senior PI of the Naya Nagar Police Station, Vilas Supe in Mira Road demanding registration of an FIR, thorough and fair investigation and prompt legal action against MLAs Geeta Jain and Nitesh Rane. The residents had sought action by the police by alleging that both the MLAs were to be held responsible for unnecessarily stoking communal fires over the Ram Temple event at Ayodhya on January 2.

Action against multiple hate speeches:

The petitioners have sought directions to the police to register FIRs against MLAs Nitish Rane, Geeta Jain, and T. Raja under sections 153, 153A, 153B, 295A, 504, and 505 of the IPC for allegedly having delivered hate speeches in Mira Road, Govandi, and Ghatkopar on various dates.

Hate speech 1: The petitioners have demanded for the High Court to direct the police to register FIRs against MLA Nitish Rane for delivering multiple hate speeches.

It is essential to highlight here that a total of three hate speeches were highlighted by the petitioners in the writ petition. The first hate speech against which action was sought had been delivered by MLA Nitish Rane and MLA Geeta Jain at Mira Road on January 23, 2024. On January 22, motorcycles adorned with saffron flags converged upon Naya Nagar, Mira Road, with the intent to incite fear and inflict harm upon local residents. Despite efforts by law enforcement to contain the situation, instances of vandalism and violence persisted, as evidenced by reported vehicular damage and other acts of aggression. The dissemination of hate speech and incendiary rhetoric by elected representatives, notably MLA Geeta Jain, further exacerbated tensions and contributed to the breakdown of law and order.

Furthermore, on January 23, false narratives perpetuated by MLA Geeta Bharat Jain regarding barricades purportedly erected by Muslims and discriminatory practices against Hindus only served to inflame communal tensions. Her misleading remarks and baseless assertions during interviews with media outlets, wherein she falsely alleged that Muslims were demanding “10-15 minutes (freehand),” only added fuel to the fire. Moreover, her statement claiming, “We are greater in numbers, if they need 10-15 minutes, we only need 5 minutes which will be good enough for them,” lacks any substantiation and further aggravates the situation.

Following her hate speech, on the next day, January 24, mobs on bikes with saffron flags went on a spree and vandalised shops of Muslim establishments. She demanded that the barricades, which were put up by the police administration to ensure law and order, be removed.

Notably, Rane had made incendiary posts on ‘X’ (formerly Twitter), by making the statement “chun-chun ke marenge”.

The petitions claims that multiple major and minor clashes broke out after their speeches, which makes it crucial to take action against these two for incitement through hate speech.

Hate speech 2: In the petition, two other speeches delivered by Rane at Govandi on February 10 and March 10 had been highlighted. On February 10, Rane was seen participating in Govandi’s Shivaji Nagar at Hindutva rally which was marked with reports of aggressive anti-Muslim slogans such as “Band karo, band karo, Love-jihad band karo,” and “Tu Durga ban, tu kali ban, kabhi na burqe wali ban.”

Addressing the media, Nitesh Rane had delivered an incendiary statement and promised a similar result to what happened in Mira Road for the people of Shivaji Nagar. He asserted, “Shivaji Nagar will also have the bulldozer. The Hindu here is also not safe. All of our Mankur-Shivajinagar area is becoming a mini-Bangladesh. Today our Hindu samaj stepped on the streets. Today here, a huge number of ‘illegal’ Masjids and madarsa are created by land jihad, these should be removed. Otherwise, we will do whatever we can – with the government. What happened in Mira Road, will happen here too, the bulldozer will be deployed.”

Hate speech 3: The petitioners have also sought for action against Singh’s speech at Mira Road on February 25. On February 25, a ‘Hindu Jan Aakrosh Morcha’ was taken out in Mira Road area of Thane, Maharashtra. The chief speaker at this event was BJP MLA T. Raja Singh. Singh, who had granted conditional permission to deliver a speech at the said rally, could be seen using anti-Muslim slur and provocative words. Through his speech, Singh spread misinformation and disinformation in the name of Maharashtrian revered Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. The issue of temples being demolished and mosques being built over them was raised again and again by the habitual hate-speaker to incite his audience. Referring to the recently inaugurated Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, and the violent act of demolition of the Babri Mosque, the BJP leader called for repeating the same in mosques present in Kashi and Mathura towns. The full details of the 40 minute speech by Singh can be accessed here. 

Action sought through the petition:

The petition provides that as the Election Commission of India has announced the schedule for the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, the Model Code of Conduct has come into force. Hence, the petitioners underscore that if action is not taken against these individuals, it may embolden them and other political leaders to resort to hate speech and incitement with the sole aim of polarizing the citizens for votes.

The petition states “The Petitioners apprehend that if action is not taken against individual like MLA Nitish Rane, MLA Geeta Jain, and Legislator T. Raja for spreading hate speech and inciting violence, the same may embolden them as well as other political leaders to resort to hate speech and incitement with the sole aim of polarizing the citizens for votes. It is submitted that the same may not only result in widespread violence, but shall also hamper free and fair elections, which are part of the basic structure of the Constitution of India.”

The petitioners have also emphasised that communal harmony, religious freedom, and the rule of law are part of the basic structure of the Constitution of India and if hate speech is not prosecuted, it puts all three of them at risk. Emphasising a delay of eight weeks in filing cases against the hate speakers, the petitions states “Because, the proclamations / speeches made are widely available on the internet and qualify as both extreme hate speech and also as violent speech inciting targeted killings of citizens from a minority community, which would pass the ‘spark in a powder keg’ test laid down in in Ragarajan v. P. Jagjeevan Ram and Ors. (1989) 2 sec 574”.

In addition to ensuring action and filing of FIRs, the petitioners have also sought directions to the police to file regular status reports on the investigation’s progress before the court. Notably, the case is likely to be heard on March 27, as per LiveLaw.

Related:

Sharp increase in violence against Christians, 161 incidents of violence in 75 days of 2024

Conspiracy or Coincidence? Mosques defaced in March after spate of hate speeches provoking the crime weeks before

Report: 668 incidents of hate speech in 2023; BJP major player

The post Bombay High Court: Plea seeking FIR against three BJP legislators for delivering hate speeches, highlights inaction by police even after Supreme Court guidelines appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The complaint has been signed by Sadique Basha, Adv. Sanjay Pande, ⁠Sukhdev Banbanci, ⁠Saboor Ansari, Jhulmi Ram Yadav(Writer), ⁠Vinod Chand and ⁠Saroja Rajeshwari.

The detailed complaint states that on January 22, motorcycles adorned with saffron flags converged upon Naya Nagar, Mira Road, with the intent to incite fear and inflict harm upon local residents. Despite efforts by law enforcement to contain the situation, instances of vandalism and violence persisted, as evidenced by reported vehicular damage and other acts of aggression. The dissemination of hate speech and incendiary rhetoric by elected representatives, notably MLA Geeta Jain, further exacerbated tensions and contributed to the breakdown of law and order.

Furthermore, on January 23, false narratives perpetuated by MLA Geeta Bharat Jain regarding barricades purportedly erected by Muslims and discriminatory practices against Hindus only served to inflame communal tensions. Her misleading remarks and baseless assertions during interviews with media outlets, wherein she falsely alleged that Muslims were demanding “10-15 minutes (freehand),” only added fuel to the fire. Moreover, her statement claiming, “We are greater in numbers, if they need 10-15 minutes, we only need 5 minutes which will be good enough for them,” lacks any substantiation and further aggravates the situation.

Following her hate speech, on the next day, January 24, mobs on bikes with saffron flags went on a spree and vandalised shops of Muslim establishments. She demanded that the barricades, which were put up by the police administration to ensure law and order, be removed.

It is deeply troubling that despite arrests made in connection with the initial altercation on January 21st, no substantive action has been taken against those responsible for subsequent acts of violence and vandalism on January 22 and 24. The individuals behind these reprehensible acts, including MLA Geeta Jain and MLA Nitesh Rane, must be held accountable for their role in inciting communal strife and perpetuating hate speech.

The complaint demands that the police must:

1. Conduct a thorough investigation into the incidents of violence and vandalism on January 22 and 24 and ensure that those responsible are brought to justice.
2. Initiate legal proceedings against MLA Geeta Jain and MLA Nitesh Rane under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code, including but not limited to:

• Section 153A: Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony.
• Section 295A: Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.
• Section 505: Making, publishing, or circulating any statement, rumour, or report with intent to incite, or which is likely to incite, any class or community of persons to commit any offence against any other class or community.
• Section 427: Mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees or upwards.
• Section 186: Obstructing public servants in discharge of public functions.

Provide reassurance to the residents of our community that their safety and security are paramount and that measures are being taken to prevent further incidents of communal tension and lawlessness.

Finally drawing a distinction between free speech and hate speech, residents of Mira Road have quoted substantively from several judgements of the Supreme Court of India on the issue, including recent directives to ensure that guilty politicians are prosecuted.

The entire complaint may be read here:

Date : February 3, 2024

To,

Senior PI, Nayanagar Police Station, Vilas Supe

CC: Commissioner of Police
Mira-Bhayandar Vasai Virar

Subject: Urgent Demand for FIR against MLA Geeta Jain and MLA Nitesh Rane

Respected Sir,

We write to you with great concern regarding the distressing series of events that have recently unfolded in our city, particularly the concerning incidents of communal tension and lawlessness that occurred on January 21, 22, and 24. It is imperative that immediate action is taken to address the root cause of these events and ensure justice for the affected community.

On January 21, 2024 an altercation between two groups escalated into a situation of heightened communal tensions, resulting in vehicular damage and minor injuries. While the prompt response of the police administration in barricading and sealing off the affected area was commendable, it proved insufficient in quelling the subsequent wave of violence and unrest.

Subsequently, on January 22, motorcycles adorned with saffron flags converged upon Naya Nagar, Mira Road, with the intent to incite fear and inflict harm upon local residents. Despite efforts by law enforcement to contain the situation, instances of vandalism and violence persisted, as evidenced by reported vehicular damage and other acts of aggression. The dissemination of hate speech and incendiary rhetoric by elected representatives, notably MLA Geeta Jain, further exacerbated tensions and contributed to the breakdown of law and order.

Furthermore, on January 23, false narratives perpetuated by MLA Geeta Bharat Jain regarding barricades purportedly erected by Muslims and discriminatory practices against Hindus only served to inflame communal tensions. Her misleading remarks and baseless assertions during interviews with media outlets, wherein she falsely alleged that Muslims were demanding “10-15 minutes (freehand),” only added fuel to the fire. Moreover, her statement claiming, “We are greater in numbers, if they need 10-15 minutes, we only need 5 minutes which will be good enough for them,” lacks any substantiation and further aggravates the situation.

Following her hate speech, on the next day, January 24, mobs on bikes with saffron flags went on a spree and vandalised shops of Muslim establishments. She demanded that the barricades, which were put up by the police administration to ensure law and order, be removed.

It is deeply troubling that despite arrests made in connection with the initial altercation on January 21st, no substantive action has been taken against those responsible for subsequent acts of violence and vandalism on January 22 and 24. The individuals behind these reprehensible acts, including MLA Geeta Jain and MLA Nitesh Rane, must be held accountable for their role in inciting communal strife and perpetuating hate speech.

Therefore, we urge you to take immediate action to address the following demands:

1. Conduct a thorough investigation into the incidents of violence and vandalism on January 22 and 24 and ensure that those responsible are brought to justice.
2. Initiate legal proceedings against MLA Geeta Jain and MLA Nitesh Rane under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code, including but not limited to:

• Section 153A: Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony.
• Section 295A: Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.
• Section 505: Making, publishing, or circulating any statement, rumour, or report with intent to incite, or which is likely to incite, any class or community of persons to commit any offence against any other class or community.
• Section 427: Mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees or upwards.
• Section 186: Obstructing public servants in discharge of public functions.

Provide reassurance to the residents of our community that their safety and security are paramount and that measures are being taken to prevent further incidents of communal tension and lawlessness.

Sir you must be aware of recent judgements and jurisprudence from the Honourable Supreme Court that clearly distinguish between hate speech and free speech.

Free Speech is not Hate Speech, Sir as the latter (Hate Speech) often misuses positions of power and privilege to further marginalise and stigmatise a section that is structurally, socially and politically disadvantaged. Unchecked proliferation of such telecasts by the electronic media have the deleterious impact of misinforming and prejudicing public discourse, often as a precursor to social ostracization and even violence.

Honourable Supreme Court on Hate Speech:

1. In the case of Amish Devgan vs. Union of India and others [Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 160 OF 2020 decided on December 7, 2020], the Supreme Court held thus,

“The unity and integrity of the nation cannot be overlooked and slighted, as the acts that ‘promote’ or are ‘likely’ to ‘promote’ divisiveness, alienation and schematism do directly and indirectly impinge on the diversity and pluralism, and when they are with the objective and intent to cause public disorder or to demean dignity of the targeted groups, they have to be dealt with as per law….Such threats not only insidiously weaken virtue and superiority of diversity, but cut-back and lead to demands depending on the context and occasion, for suppression of freedom to express and speak on the ground of reasonableness. Freedom and rights cannot extend to create public disorder or armour those who challenge integrity and unity of the country or promote and incite violence.”

“In this context, it is necessary to draw a distinction between ‘free speech’ which includes the right to comment, favour or criticise government policies; and ‘hate 10 speech’ creating or spreading hatred against a targeted community or group….The object of criminalising the latter type of speech is to protect the dignity (as explained above) and to ensure political and social equality between different identities and groups regardless of caste, creed, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, linguistic preference etc.” (Para 54)

1. In Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan v. Union of India (writ petition (c) no. 157 of 2013) decided on March 12, 2014, (Para 7), the Supreme Court had unambiguously stated:

Hate speech is an effort to marginalise individuals based on their membership in a group. Using expression that exposes the group to hatred, hate speech seeks to delegitimise group members in the eyes of the majority, reducing their social standing and acceptance within society. Hate speech, therefore, rises beyond causing distress to individual group members. It can have a societal impact. Hate speech lays the groundwork for later, broad attacks on vulnerable that can range from discrimination, to ostracism, segregation, deportation, violence and, in the most extreme cases, to genocide. Hate speech also impacts a protected group’s ability to respond to the substantive ideas under debate, thereby placing a serious barrier to their full participation in our democracy. (Para 7)

• The Law Commission Report, 2017 stated that “hate speech has the potential of provoking individuals or society to commit acts of terrorism, genocides, ethnic cleansing etc. Such speech is considered outside the realm of protective discourse. Indisputably, offensive speech has real and devastating effects on people’s lives and risks their health and safety. It is harmful and divisive for communities and hampers social progress. If left unchecked hate speech can severely affect right to life of every individual.” (Chapter VI, Para 6.5)

1. In the Sudarshan News case (Firoz Iqbal Khan v UOI – WP[CIV] NO. 956/2020]), the Supreme Court had observed that, “the edifice of a democratic society committed to the rule of law under a regime of constitutional rights, values and duties is founded on the co-existence of communities. India is a melting pot of civilizations, cultures, religions and languages. Any attempt to vilify a religious community must be viewed with grave disfavour by this Court as the custodian of constitutional values constitutional values demands nothing less.”

We would be happy to provide these Orders to you if so required/needed.

We trust that you will give due consideration to these urgent matters and take appropriate action to uphold the rule of law and ensure the well-being of our community. Thank you for your attention to this pressing issue.

Sincerely,

1. Sadique Basha
2. ⁠Adv. Sanjay Pande
3. ⁠Sukhdev Banbanci
4. ⁠Saboor Ansari
5. Alim Shaikh
6. Ahesan ISAF
7. Chand Shaikh
8. ⁠Jhulmi Ram Yadav
9. ⁠Vinod Chand
10. ⁠Saroja Rajeshwari

The post Conduct Fair Inquiry, take action against MLAs Geeta Jain and Nitesh Rane: Citizens of Mira Road-Bhayandar appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The citizens group had earlier met with the commissioner of police, MBVV, asking him to take action against hate speeches in Mira-Bhayandar. The police are yet to take any action against the speaker, Kajal Hindustani or the organisers of the event where economic boycott of Muslims was called for. 

The post Police disrupt anti hate-speech campaign in Mira-Bhayandar  appeared first on SabrangIndia.