Society’s outrage no justification for curbing free speech, says court
Society’s outrage alone is not justification for suppressing free speech, a Delhi court said as it dismissed a complaint filed against Kerala legislator KT Jaleel over his alleged controversial remarks on Kashmir in August.
Advocate GS Mani had filed a complaint against Jaleel, who in a Facebook post in August referred to Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK) as “Azad Kashmir” and Jammu and Kashmir as “India-occupied Jammu and Kashmir”.
In his post on his Srinagar visit, the MLA also criticised the bifurcation of J&K and repeal of the Article 370 that gave special powers to the erstwhile state.
Additional sessions judge Harjeet Singh Jaspal on Friday said even though the statements of Jaleel are “unpopular”, “outrageous” and “are rather offensive”, the freedom of speech protects actions that society may find very offensive. “Society’s outrage alone is not justification for suppressing free speech,” the
court said in a 23-page order.
The judge said the statements cannot be called an offence as they do not suggest a calculation to promote a feeling of enmity or hatred between different religions/castes/groups or an imputation prejudicial to national integration or a call to raise arms against the sovereign state.
“It appears to be a statement made in haste with the aim to get undue political mileage, sacrificing factual correctness and the truth itself,” the Rouse Avenue Courts in Delhi said.
“The maker of the statement ought to be a person of misconceived knowledge, misconstrued facts and misplaced beliefs,” the court added.
“It is absolutely incorrect and rather foolish to believe that either of the two communities does not consider Kashmir as an integral part of India,” the judge said.
“Both Hindus and Muslims and all citizens of all religions, idolise the idea of the Kashmir being an inalienable part of the territory of India and the idea of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir being called “Azad Kashmir” will equally anguish and disgust both the communities or rather every Indian of every community.”
The judge, however, expressed anguish over the statement made by Thavanur legislator Jaleel as well as the submissions made by the complainant-advocate, noting that they suggested that there can be law and order situation between two religious’ communities, “merely on a loose and incorrect statement of an irresponsible politician”.
It further said that the “social set up, the secular thread and fraternity in democratic Indian background cannot be assumed to be that feeble that it would break or get bruised on random statements of selfish politicians”.