NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted interim protection from arrest to cartoonist Hemant Malviya , who is facing charges for allegedly sharing objectionable social media content related to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, RSS members, and Hindu deities during the Covid-19 pandemic.
The bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Aravind Kumar issued a clear warning that if Malviya posts any further offensive content, “then state [is] free to act against him under law.”
The court was hearing Malviya’s anticipatory bail plea after the Madhya Pradesh High Court rejected his request on July 3. During the proceedings, a bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Aravind Kumar questioned the nature of the post and the broader implications for freedom of expression.
"Why do you do all this?" the bench asked Malviya’s counsel, Advocate Vrinda Grover. In response, Grover said, “It may be unpalatable. Let me say it is in poor taste. Let me go to that extent. But is it an offence? My lords have said, it can be offensive but it is not an offence. I am simply on law. I am not trying to justify anything.” She added that the post had been deleted.
Justice Dhulia remarked during the hearing, “Whatever we may do with this case, but this is definitely the case that the freedom of speech and expression is being abused.”
Representing the Madhya Pradesh government, Additional Solicitor General K M Nataraj argued that such acts had been repeated and suggested the issue went beyond maturity. “It is not the question of maturity alone. It is something more,” he said.
Grover pointed out that there had been no law and order situation since the cartoon was published, questioning whether arrest and custody were necessary in a case involving personal liberty. She also requested interim relief for Malviya till the next hearing, which the court granted.
Malviya is facing charges under multiple provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, including Section 196 (acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony), Section 299 (outraging religious feelings), Section 352 (intentional insult), as well as Section 67-A of the IT Act for publishing sexually explicit content online.
The FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint by RSS worker and lawyer Vinay Joshi, who alleged that Malviya’s posts, including a cartoon and comments related to Lord Shiva, had hurt religious sentiments and disturbed communal harmony. Malviya’s lawyer told the High Court that he only posted the cartoon and could not be held responsible for comments made by others.
The bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Aravind Kumar issued a clear warning that if Malviya posts any further offensive content, “then state [is] free to act against him under law.”
The court was hearing Malviya’s anticipatory bail plea after the Madhya Pradesh High Court rejected his request on July 3. During the proceedings, a bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Aravind Kumar questioned the nature of the post and the broader implications for freedom of expression.
"Why do you do all this?" the bench asked Malviya’s counsel, Advocate Vrinda Grover. In response, Grover said, “It may be unpalatable. Let me say it is in poor taste. Let me go to that extent. But is it an offence? My lords have said, it can be offensive but it is not an offence. I am simply on law. I am not trying to justify anything.” She added that the post had been deleted.
Justice Dhulia remarked during the hearing, “Whatever we may do with this case, but this is definitely the case that the freedom of speech and expression is being abused.”
Representing the Madhya Pradesh government, Additional Solicitor General K M Nataraj argued that such acts had been repeated and suggested the issue went beyond maturity. “It is not the question of maturity alone. It is something more,” he said.
Grover pointed out that there had been no law and order situation since the cartoon was published, questioning whether arrest and custody were necessary in a case involving personal liberty. She also requested interim relief for Malviya till the next hearing, which the court granted.
Malviya is facing charges under multiple provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, including Section 196 (acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony), Section 299 (outraging religious feelings), Section 352 (intentional insult), as well as Section 67-A of the IT Act for publishing sexually explicit content online.
The FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint by RSS worker and lawyer Vinay Joshi, who alleged that Malviya’s posts, including a cartoon and comments related to Lord Shiva, had hurt religious sentiments and disturbed communal harmony. Malviya’s lawyer told the High Court that he only posted the cartoon and could not be held responsible for comments made by others.
You may also like
Health: Do you get only 4-5 hours of sleep at night? Are you suffering from this syndrome? Know what this problem is..
26/11: Tahawwur Rana seeks NIA court nod for regular phone chats with kin
Coronation Street fans 'rumble what Carla's hiding' after laptop clue
Warning labels on food not selective towards Indian snacks, says govt
Air fryers will be free of grease in 15 minutes if you use 2 ingredients — no scrubbing
