The Supreme Court of India has emphasized that any attempts to spread communal hatred or engage in hate speech must be dealt with an iron hand. A bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar made this strong observation while hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Advocate Vishal Tiwari. The PIL targeted politicians who were making hate speeches and provocative comments concerning the cases challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025.
Although the Court did not issue any specific direction in this petition, it strongly reminded authorities of their duty to act against hate speech. The bench categorically stated:
"Any attempt to cause alienation or humiliation of the targeted group is a criminal offence and must be dealt with accordingly."
The Court highlighted that hate speech is not only a violation of law but also an attack on the dignity and self-worth of the targeted group. It contributes to social disharmony, weakens tolerance, and undermines the multicultural fabric of society. The Supreme Court made it clear that such behavior cannot be tolerated.
In April 2023, the Supreme Court had previously directed all States to suo motu (on their own) register First Information Reports (FIRs) against hate speech incidents without waiting for any written complaint. This direction showcased the Court’s strict approach towards curbing hate speech.
Read also: Supreme Court Urges Centre to Clear Collegium Recommendations to Address High Court Vacancies
The PIL also raised concerns about comments made by BJP MP Nishikant Dubey, who allegedly attacked the judiciary and CJI Sanjiv Khanna after the Court intervened in the petitions challenging the Waqf Amendment Act.
The Supreme Court expressed strong disapproval of Dubey's comments, calling them "highly irresponsible" and "attention-seeking." The bench further noted:
"Highly Irresponsible, Shows Ignorance": Supreme Court Deplores BJP MP Nishikant Dubey's Comments Against Judiciary & CJI.
Despite the sharp criticism, the Court refrained from initiating any action against Dubey, emphasizing that public confidence in the judiciary should not be shaken by "such absurd comments."
Read also: Supreme Court Directs Grant of Disability Pension to Army Veteran Diagnosed with Schizophrenia
During the hearing, the Supreme Court also addressed the issue of judicial review, asserting that it is a constitutional function and must be upheld. The Court rejected any claims of parliamentary supremacy over constitutional functions, emphasizing that the Constitution is supreme.
"Constitution Is Higher Than All; Judicial Review A Constitutional Function": Supreme Court Debunks Parliamentary Supremacy Claim.
The Court’s observations in this case underline its commitment to maintaining communal harmony and protecting the dignity of all citizens.
Case Title : Vishal Tiwari vs Union of India
