Why SC Said Existing Hate Speech Laws Are Adequate
Practice PYQs on this topic
500+ questions on Polity with explanations
📌 Summary:
-
SC bench (Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta) held on April 29, 2026 that existing legal provisions adequately cover hate speech — no legislative vacuum exists
-
Key finding: IPC Sections 153A (promoting enmity), 295A (outraging religious sentiments), 505 (public mischief) are sufficient; BNS equivalents similarly comprehensive
-
Rejected Law Commission of India's 2017 recommendation for new hate speech-specific offences
-
Trigger: Petitions cited media coverage of Tablighi Jamaat during COVID-19, speeches at religious gatherings, police inaction
-
Core issue identified by SC: Uneven enforcement, not absence of law — police and state complicity in selective application
-
Rejected "continuing mandamus": SC refused to become ongoing supervisory body over executive; such oversight violates separation of powers
-
Constitutional framework: Article 19(1)(a) guarantees free speech; Article 19(2) allows reasonable restrictions for public order, religious sentiments — existing IPC/BNS provisions operate within this framework
-
Significance: Accountability placed firmly on executive enforcement; police inaction now constitutionally actionable
UPSC Classification
See PYQs related to “Polity”
Every classification tag above links to actual UPSC questions asked on that topic — with answer, explanation and elimination logic. Only in the app.