NEW DELHI: Observing that brotherhood serves as a crucial element of national unity and social cohesion, the Supreme Court said that public figures holding high constitutional offices cannot target any particular community on the basis of religion, language, caste or region.
The Supreme Court said that no one, including state and non-state actors, can defame or defame any community through speeches, memes, cartoons or visual arts.
These observations were made by Justice Ujjal Bhuyan in a separate judgment on the plea challenging the release of Netflix’s upcoming crime thriller ‘Ghooskhor Pandat’.
“It is constitutionally impermissible for any person, whether state or non-state actors, through any means, such as speeches, memes, cartoons, visual arts, etc., to defame and discredit any community.
“It would be a violation of the Constitution to target any particular community on the basis of religion, language, caste or region whatever. This applies in particular to public figures holding high constitutional positions who have taken a solemn oath to uphold the Constitution,” Justice Bhuiyan wrote in his 39-page ruling.
A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Bhuyan on February 19 disposed of a petition seeking stay on the release of the film after director Neeraj Pandey’s statement was placed on record, and said that there is expected to be a lull in the controversy in all respects.
In his judgment, Justice Bhuiyan said that one of the solemn objectives of the Constitution enumerated in the Preamble is to promote brotherhood among all citizens of India, and to ensure the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the nation.
“Thus, developing a sense of brotherhood and respect for fellow citizens irrespective of caste, religion or language is a constitutional dharma that each one of us must follow,” the judge wrote.
Justice Bhuiyan said that freedom of thought and expression is one of the highest ideals of our Constitution and Article 19 grants this fundamental right to all citizens.
“Reasonable restrictions under Article 19 must remain reasonable and not fanciful or oppressive. Article 19 cannot be allowed to override fundamental rights under Article 19 including the right to freedom of speech and expression,” he wrote.
This article was generated from an automated news feed without any modifications to the text.
