NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court was on Wednesday asked why a call for 'Sar Tan Se Juda' by Muslims is not treated as a hate speech and why it failed to take cognisance of an open call for genocides of Brahmins, Hindus and even Christians.
Supported by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain raised the question before a bench of Justices K M Joseph and B V Nagarathna, which heard a matter related to the hate speech filed by Kerala-based multi media journalist Shaheen Abdullah.
A counsel appearing for Hindu Samaj also sought to allay an observation made by the bench that they should not go that level where statements, denigrating a community, or 'Go to Pakistan' are made.
"We will never go to that level as long as my client is a majority in this country," he said.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta also asked the bench to let him play a publically available hate speech clip against not only against Hindus and but Christians also in Kerala.
SG Mehta also referred to a speech by DMK spokesman for allegedly demanding "genocide of all Brahmins as suggested by Periyar".
"If you want equality, you must butcher all Brahmins," he cited the statement.
As Justice Joseph laughed, Mehta said, "It is not a laughing matter. I would not laugh it away. This man does not face an FIR, not only that, he continued to be the spokesman of a recognised political party."
Justice Joseph then asked Mehta if he knew who Periyar was.
Mehta said he knew who Periyar was and the hate speech can't be justified just because "someone great" said it.
He also asked the bench why it should consider only selective speeches against one particular community.
The top court, however, preferred to ask the Maharashtra government only to respond by April 28 to a contempt petition filed by a Kerala resident against hate speeches made over there.
During the hearing, advocate Nizamuddin Pasha raised issues of hate speeches made in Maharashtra on the plea filed by one Saheen Abdullah.
Advocate Jain referred to a plea related to some recent instances of "hate speeches, utterances and statements" made against Hindus and Hindu religion by members of Muslim and Christian community, including call for beheading 'Sar Tan se Juda', followed by actual severing of heads of innocent victims.
He asked why his plea was not taken into consideration.
Mehta, on his part, sought to play the video clip related to elimination of Hindus and Christians from Kerala. "Why are we shying away from looking at it," he asked.
That public spirited person who hailed from Kerala is not bringing hate speeches from his own state, he contended.
"I want the court to see it. Unfortunately, it is from Kerala. If the petitioner showing something is disturbing, this should shock the conscience of the court on two counts --one such a thing has happened and this public spirited person (petitioner) who hails from Kerala, is not bringing this fact to the notice of the court," Mehta said.
"We know this," Justice Joseph said.
"Then, this court should have taken suo motu cognisance along with this...why are we shying away from seeing this," Mehta asked the bench.
The bench, however, said there is a method of doing it.
The bench, however, said that the major problem is that politicians make use of religion.
Mehta then said this clip from Kerala has nothing to do with the politics as it is "pure and simple hate speech on the basis of religion".
Justice Joseph then reportedly remarked hate is a vicious circle and the people would react to it.
During the hearing, the court also observed the hate speech is going on because the State is impotent, powerless and doesnt act in time.
"Why do we have the State at all if it is silent," the bench asked.
The court also stressed that there must be restraint on every citizen. The bench said that citizens of this country should take a pledge not to vilify other members in the country.
The court also said that the major problem is that politicians make use of religion. It also emphasised at the need for the State to cull the hate speech.
