The Supreme Court on Monday urged both the Centre and state governments to regulate hate speech while ensuring that the fundamental right to freedom of expression remains protected. The observation came during the hearing of a petition filed by Wajahat Khan, the original complainant in a case involving social media influencer Sharmistha Panoli.
A bench comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and KV Viswanathan expressed concern over the growing misuse of free speech to justify hate-filled content. “Why aren’t people finding such speech jarring, improper?” the bench questioned, stressing that there must be some regulation of online content and that citizens should exercise restraint when it comes to liking or sharing hate speech. The bench further remarked that people need to be educated about the value of freedom of speech and that no one wants the state to intervene and impose regulations unless absolutely necessary.
Wajahat Khan, who initially filed the complaint against Panoli, is now facing multiple FIRs himself. He has been booked in several states for allegedly posting social media content that incited hatred and communal disharmony. He is currently in police custody for one case and in judicial custody for another, both registered in West Bengal. In Monday’s hearing, the Supreme Court asked the Centre, the states, and Khan’s counsel to come up with practical suggestions on how hate speech can be effectively regulated without infringing upon the constitutional right to free expression.
Also Read: India seeks way to save nurse in Yemen, SC steps in
This development comes nearly three weeks after the top court granted interim protection to Khan by staying his arrest in all FIRs registered outside West Bengal. The court, while continuing that relief, questioned the purpose of lodging multiple FIRs and repeatedly incarcerating him. “What’s the point of more FIRs and putting the person in jail?” the bench asked. Responding to this, Khan’s counsel submitted that his client had apologised for his earlier social media posts. “My complaint has come back to bite me. There is no excuse for my conduct. The tweets were old and were reactions to certain events. I have apologised,” Khan’s lawyer stated. He further requested the court to consolidate the FIRs and assess whether they actually relate to the same tweet.
During the previous hearing on June 24, the bench—comprising Justices Viswanathan and N Kotiswar Singh—had issued notices to the Centre and the states of Assam, Delhi, Haryana, and West Bengal, seeking their response to Khan’s plea for the consolidation of FIRs filed across multiple states.
Khan was arrested on June 9, and his legal team maintains that the FIRs against him were filed in retaliation to his original complaint against influencer Sharmistha Panoli. Panoli had been arrested for allegedly offending religious sentiments through a video she posted in the aftermath of Operation Sindoor. She was later granted interim bail by the Calcutta High Court.
Also Read: SC to hear suo moto plea on ED summoning lawyers on Monday
Follow us
