New Delhi, July 11 The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear, on July 14, the anticipatory bail plea of cartoonist Hemant Malviya, who was booked by Madhya Pradesh Police for allegedly sharing “indecent” social media posts about the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) functionaries and BJP leaders.
A Bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Joymalya Bagchi agreed to hear the matter on coming Monday after advocate Vrinda Grover mentioned it for urgent listing.
The caricature, showing an RSS figure with khaki shorts pulled down and the Prime Minister administering an injection to the exposed figure, was accompanied by a provocative caption referencing "derogatory lines involving Lord Shiva" and the "caste census".
In his special leave petition (SLP) filed before the apex court, Malviya questioned the validity of the order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court denying him pre-arrest bail.
In its impugned order, issued on July 3, a single-judge Bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar denied the relief to the accused, observing that such content had the potential to disrupt social harmony and Malviya had "clearly overstepped the threshold of freedom of speech and expression".
The Bench of Justice Abhyankar said that the content, along with Malviya's endorsement and his invitation for others to modify and share the cartoon, was not in good taste and constituted a deliberate act meant to outrage religious sentiments.
The Lasudia police station in Indore registered a case against Malviya for offences punishable under Sections 196, 299, 302, 352, and 353(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section 67-A of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
The prosecution argued that the cartoon was a repeated attempt by Malviya to malign the image of the RSS and disturb social harmony.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court concurred, emphasising that the freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution does not extend to deliberate acts that insult religion or promote discord. It concluded that the caricature, along with Malviya's public endorsement, crossed the bounds of lawful satire and warranted serious legal consequences.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor