Delhi HC Women Lawyers Forum Condemns Inflammatory Slogans Raised In Jantar Mantar Rally

FACTS OF THE CASE

• The Delhi High Court Women Lawyers Forum wrote a letter to the Registrar of the Supreme Court against the allegedly inflammatory slogans, which were raised by Supreme Court Lawyer Ashwini Updhayaya on 8th August 2021, during a rally at the Jantar Mantar.
• In the letter, they urged the concerned authorities like the Bar Council to take note of the incident.
• They also demanded to initiate appropriate action immediately for restoring and upholding the rule of law and other salient principles that are embedded in the Constitution of India.
• The Forum also stressed upon the fact that such an episode should not be taken lightly.

STATEMENTS IN THE REPORT

• In the reports, it was claimed that the several slogans that were raised during the alleged rally amounted to be hate speech against the Muslim community.
• Apart from that, a video of the event which went viral through the social media which indicated that a mob was chanting the following slogan throughout the rally -
• "Jab Mulle kaate jaayenge, Tab Ram Ram Chillayenge." (Which means that when Muslims are slaughtered, they will scream Ram Ram for help).
• They further stated that such slogans tend to result in violence, either direct or structural, as the community is targeted by such speech.
• These slogans prime facie are considered as hate speech and they are not protected under right to speech of the Indian Constitution.
• The letter also said that these speeches made at the rally must not be confused with the right to freedom of dissenting or critical speech.
• They also violated the Indian Penal Code.

LEGAL PROVISIONS DISCUSSED

• Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code states that whoever by any words, signs or any visible representations promotes or even tries to promote disharmony on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or creates disharmony, would be punished with imprisonment till three years, or fine, or both.
• Section 295(A) of the Indian Penal Code states that whoever intentionally outrages the religious feelings of any class of citizens would be punished with imprisonment or with fine, or both.

PRECEDENTS OBSERVED

• They borrowed a phrase from the decision of Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan Ram & Ors.
• The Forum called slogans and speeches that were organised by the Advocate, akin to 'a spark in a powder keg'.
• To support their stand against hate speech and prove that it must not go unpunished, they relied upon the Supreme Court's recent decision in Amish Devgan v. Union of India (2021), where the Court held that "in a polity committed to pluralism, hate speech cannot conceivably contribute in any legitimate way to democracy and, in fact, repudiates the right to equality."

WHAT ACTION DO YOU THINK SHOULD BE TAKEN?