‘Different views not hate speech’
MUMBAI: A different viewpoint does not become “hate speech” merely because it is harsh or extreme, the Bombay high court observed on Wednesday while striking down a first information report (FIR) registered against a Vashi resident for allegedly trying to created hatred between two religious groups by reposting a video on her Twitter handle along with her view.
A division bench of justice SS Shinde and justice MS Karnik said the right to express your view is a protected and cherished right in our democracy. “Merely because the point of view of the petitioner is extreme or harsh does not make it a hate speech, as it is only expressing a different point of view,” the bench added, striking down an FIR registered by Azad Maidan police against Vashi resident Sunaina Holey, accusing the 39-year-old of creating hatred between different religions.
On April 15, she was booked after she reposted on her Twitter handle a video of an individual addressing the huge crowd of migrant labourers who had gathered outside Bandra railway station on April 14, 2020, amid nationwide lockdown along with a purportedly objectionable message.
On April 14, a rumour that trains were restarted was spread, attracting huge crowd of migrants who were desperate to return to their native places. As the atmosphere become tense, the police requested a man to pacify the crowd and he started to say that the pandemic was an act of God. When he was speaking, one person in the crowd shouted that Covid-19 pandemic was not an act of God but had been brought upon by the Prime Minister of
India. Someone shot the entire sequence and circulated it on social media. Holey retweeted the video with a message critical of the authorities The HC said the intent of the petitioner was to criticise and counter the viewpoint of the person in the video who was blaming the PMO. “Reading of the contents of the tweet would reveal that neither any community nor any religion is named,” said the bench. “It is difficult to arrive at the conclusion that the Petitioner has mens rea to commit alleged offence under section 153A of the IPC.”
The HC added the concern of the police machinery to control the situation though justified, but the approach in registering the FIR for the comments made on the Twitter feed by the petitioner on the apprehension that the same may lead to promoting hatred or enmity between different groups was “too far-fetched and remote”.