A view of the Supreme Court of India. File | Photo Credit: The Hindu
India’s Supreme Court on Thursday (Dec 19, 2024) refused to hear a petition filed by senior bureaucrats and activists seeking contempt action against the Ghaziabad district administration and the Uttar Pradesh state police for granting permission. Parliament of Religions whose advertisements contain communal comments.
However, a bench headed by Chief Justice of India Sanjeev Khanna directed the authorities to keep track of the proceedings in Parliament and record the incident.
Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna has said that the Constitution has helped in the transformation of the country
The petitioners, led by advocate Prashant Bhushan and activist Aruna Roy, representing Cheryl D’Souza, alleged that the administration had given permission to the Yeti Narasimhananda Foundation. Parliament of Religions Between December 17 and December 21 in Ghaziabad, the show featured communal statements against followers of Islam, despite advertisements inciting violence against Muslims.
They argued that the alleged blunder of the district administration and the state police was “willful and willful disregard of the order of the Supreme Court in which it directed all competent and appropriate authorities. suo motu Action against individuals or groups involved in communal activities and hate speech.
In its Tehseen Poonawala judgment of 2018, the Supreme Court condemned the heinous crimes and said it was the state’s “sacred duty” to protect the lives of its citizens. The Tehseen Poonawala judgment saw the court issue a number of guidelines for states and their police forces to prevent, control and curb hate speech, mob violence and lynching.
In October 2022, the Supreme Court said it was “tragedy that we have degraded religion” in the 21st century and directed the police and authorities that “an atmosphere of hatred prevails in the country”. suo motu File a case against hate speech abusers without waiting for someone to file a formal complaint.
The Chief Justice asked the petitioners to contact the concerned authorities. ‘Not all cases can come to the Supreme Court. If I entertain one, I have to entertain everyone,” said the CJI. Mr. Bhushan emphasized that one incident should be set as an example. “If it happens in one case, it stops,” he argued.
Similar pending petitions filed by petitioners, including former High Court judge Anjana Prakash and journalist Qurban Ali, highlighted in the Supreme Court that “hate speech involves genocide of Muslims to achieve ethnic cleansing. The speeches are not mere hate speech but an open call for the killing of an entire community.” Such speeches not only threaten the unity and integrity of our country, but also the lives of millions of Muslim citizens.
These petitions brought hate speech and communal statements to the court’s attention Parliament of Religions Held in December 2022 at places like Haridwar and Delhi.
“We are living in different times where the slogan in the country has changed from Satyamev Jayate to Shastramev Jayate,” senior advocate Kapil Sibal had submitted in an earlier hearing.
published – December 19, 2024 at 04:01 am IST