New Delhi: The Supreme Court has said there is no room for hate crime in a secular country like India, and it is the primary duty of the state to protect its citizens from such crimes, news agency PTI reported.A two-judge bench of Justice K.M. Joseph and Justice B.V. Nagaratna said “there cannot be any compromise on hate speech at all”, while adding that only when the state acknowledges such crimes can a solution be found.“When action is not taken against hate crimes then an atmosphere is fostered which is very dangerous and it has to be rooted out from our lives. There cannot be any compromise on hate speech at all,” the court said.The court’s observations came on Monday, February 6, during a hearing on a petition filed by a Muslim man who had alleged that he was attacked and abused in the name of his religion by some ‘screwdriver gang’ as he boarded a car to go to Aligarh from Noida on July 4, 2021. He had alleged that police did not bother to register a complaint when he approached them.At this stage, the bench told additional solicitor general, K.M. Nataraj, appearing for the Uttar Pradesh, “If a person comes to the police and says that I was wearing a cap and my beard was pulled and abused in the name of religion and still no complaint is registered, then it is a problem.”The bench then further went on to say, “Will you not acknowledge that there is a hate crime and you will sweep it under the carpet? We are not saying anything adverse. We are only expressing our anguish. That is all.”Also read: Watch: How the Supreme Court Has Interpreted Hate Speech Over the YearsCounsel for the petitioner, Huzefa Ahmadi, brought to the attention of the bench that the apex court had on January 13 sought the case diary from the Uttar Pradesh Police, which showed that a first information report (FIR) was registered two years after the incident and that too with all bailable offences barring one.The state government’s counsel, Nataraj, accepted that there were lapses on the part of officials and informed the court that an investigation team, led by an ACP-rank official, was constituted and necessary action was taken against officials found guilty.Addressing Nataraj, the bench said, “You set an example and let such people face consequences for dereliction of duty. It is only when you take action against such incidents that we will come at par with developed nations. Yes, there has been clear lapse and there is nothing wrong in admitting a mistake.”Natraj told the court that when the incident took place on July 4, 2021, the victim had gone to a police station in Sector 37, Noida, where there were no senior officials and hence a case could not be registered.He further informed that the victim had then gone to another police station in Delhi’s Jamia Nagar and told the police there that he was robbed, assaulted, and suffered injuries. Nowhere had the victim mentioned that it was a case of hate crime and that he was assaulted and abused in the name of religion, Nataraj added.To this, Justice Nagarathna said, “At any point of time, the victim cannot be met with disparaging remarks. Victim should not make it look as if he is a perpetrator of crime.”Justice Joseph then said, “Be it in minority or majority, certain rights are inherent in human beings. You are born into a family and raised in one. We have no choice on our religion, but we stand out as a nation. That’s the beauty, the greatness of our nation. We have to understand this.”Referring to a recent incident in Rajasthan where a mute person from the Hindu community was assaulted, Justice Joseph said, “If you ignore this (hate crime), then one day it will come for you… There is no doubt that some people have a communal attitude.”At this juncture, the state government’s counsel told the court that eight FIRs were registered against the gang members and appropriate action was taken against them.The bench then sought more details on the case: when was the first FIR registered against the gang members, how many people were arrested, were they the same people who attacked the victim, and when were they bailed out.To this, Nataraj informed that he will file an affidavit providing details of all the FIRs. However, he apprised the court that the first FIR was registered in June 2021 against the “screwdriver gang” members, adding that police had not discriminated in attacking Muslims or Hindus.Countering Nataraj, the petitioner’s counsel said that it took two years to acknowledge that there was a criminal incident, and in two affidavits filed by the Uttar Pradesh government, police had said that there was no hate crime.“On July 5, 2021, a police patrol had come to my house and asked not to press for hate crime angle,” the petitioner’s counsel said, adding that the victim’s beard was pulled and stripped and made fun of for being circumcised in a car.The court then said that it cannot issue a pan-India direction on the victim’s petition under Article 32, as it may not be a case symptomatic of what is happening across the country or otherwise it will flood the courts.The state government’s counsel then retorted, saying that the police had never denied that it was a criminal incident but nowhere was it found that it was a hate crime. The victim had tried to take advantage of media hype and changed his statements, he alleged.The court then directed the Uttar Pradesh government to file a detailed affidavit on the matter and posted it for further hearing on March 3. On October 21, 2022, the top court had asked Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, and Delhi to crack down on those making hate speeches, observing, “where have we reached in the name of religion, what have we reduced religion to is tragic”.It had ordered the three states in question to promptly register criminal cases against the offenders without waiting for a complaint to be filed.
