A bench comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna and K.V. Viswanathan was hearing a plea from Wazahat Khan, who faces multiple FIRs in several states, including West Bengal, for posting content against a Hindu deity on X
Supreme Court of India, representaional image.
The Supreme Court on Monday emphasised that citizens must understand the value of the right to freedom of speech and expression and exercise self-restraint, as it deliberated on potential guidelines to regulate offensive social media posts, reported news agency PTI.
A bench comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna and K.V. Viswanathan was hearing a plea from Wazahat Khan, who faces multiple FIRs in several states, including West Bengal, for posting content against a Hindu deity on X.
"One of the fundamental duties is to uphold the unity and integrity of the country, India. So that is being violated. See, all these divisive tendencies, at least on social media, must be curbed," the court stated.
The top court continued, "But to what extent can the state curb? Instead, why can't the citizens themselves regulate themselves? Citizens must know the value of freedom of speech and expression. If they don't, then the state will step in — and who wants the state to step in? Nobody wants the state to step in."
In the interim, the top court extended the interim protection from coercive action to Khan, which was initially granted on 23rd June. Khan had filed a complaint against another social media influencer, Sharmistha Panoli, for allegedly making communal remarks in a video, reported PTI.
During the hearing, Justice Nagarathna reiterated, "The citizens must know the value of the fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression. The state can step in in case of violations; nobody wants the state to step in." The bench observed that the "divisive tendency" on social media had to be curbed.
It added, "The freedom of speech and expression is a fundamental right. But there is no self-restraint and self-regulation. If the citizens want to enjoy this fundamental right, they will have to regulate themselves, and there has to be some kind of self-restraint."
Referring to Justice Viswanathan’s observations, Justice Nagarathna further stated, "My learned brother rightly said that there should be fraternity between the citizens, then all this hatred will come down."
"We are not speaking about censorship. But in the interest of fraternity, secularism, and dignity of individuals... we will have to go into this beyond this petition," the bench observed.
Moreover, the top court highlighted that the reasonable restrictions outlined under Article 19(2) of the Constitution on freedom of speech and expression had been "rightly placed", reported PTI.
However, the court noted that cases arising from the abuse of freedom of speech and expression were "clogging the legal system."
The bench also questioned why citizens were not exercising self-restraint, particularly when using social media platforms.
"Having an opinion is one thing, but to say that in a particular way is an abuse. Sometimes it will not come to the court in the context of hate speech. My learned brother rightly said that there should be fraternity between the citizens, then all this hate will come down," Justice Nagarathna said.
Moreover, the bench asked Khan’s counsel to assist it in addressing the broader issue of self-regulation regarding citizens’ freedom of speech and expression. While posting the next hearing for four weeks later, the court ordered counsel for different states to file their responses.
Meanwhile, it is to note that Khan was arrested by Kolkata Police on June 9. He approached the apex court alleging that FIRs and complaints had been lodged against him in several states, including Assam, West Bengal, Maharashtra, and Haryana, for certain old tweets he had made. He argued that these FIRs were in retaliation for a complaint he filed against Panoli, who was arrested and later released on bail.
(With inputs from PTI)
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
