The Supreme Court of India ruled on Wednesday that there was no basis for filing a First Information Report (FIR) against BJP leaders Anurag Thakur and Parvesh Verma concerning allegations of hate speech made during a rally in January 2020. The verdict was delivered by a bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, who were addressing a petition lodged by Brinda Karat, a leader of the Communist Party of India (Marxist). This petition challenged a previous decision by the Delhi High Court that had upheld a trial court’s ruling which dismissed calls for the registration of a case against the political figures.
The controversy traces back to a rally held in January 2020, characterized by incendiary remarks made by Thakur, who incited a crowd with the slogan “desh ke gaddaron ko,” to which the audience replied, “goli maaro saalon ko.” This translates to a call to “shoot the traitors,” aimed at those opposing the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), which had sparked widespread protests across the country. Verma, addressing the same gathering, made alarming statements suggesting that the large number of protestors at Delhi’s Shaheen Bagh would invade homes and threaten the safety of women and children.
The comments made by these leaders came at a particularly tense time, just ahead of the Delhi Assembly elections. Shortly after these speeches, communal riots erupted in North East Delhi in February 2020, leading to the tragic loss of 53 lives and injuries to hundreds more. The unrest raised serious questions about the responsibilities of public figures and the impact of their words on societal harmony.
In the wake of the riots, calls for accountability echoed across various political and civil society platforms. However, the Supreme Court maintained that the allegations did not constitute a cognizable offense, which is required for an FIR to be filed. The bench concluded that the remarks, while certainly contentious, did not meet the legal threshold for criminal proceedings against the BJP leaders.
This ruling not only highlights the legal complexities surrounding hate speech and incitement but also reflects the ongoing tension within Indian politics regarding freedom of speech and the responsibilities of those in power. The court’s decision is likely to be met with mixed reactions, as many observers grapple with the implications of allowing such speech to go unchallenged in a diverse society like India.
