oppn parties Hate Speech Case: Different Yardstick For Religious Leaders?

News Snippets

  • 76-year-old retired doctor dies in Hyderabad after being held to digital 'arrest'
  • Paksitan admits that India had rejected thrid-party role in ending the conflict following the Pahalgam terror attack
  • Supreme Court seeks reply from the states about anti-conversion laws
  • Calcutta HC rules that a man cannot deny maintaenance to his wife just because she is earning
  • Stocks rebound on Tuesday: Sensex gains 594 points to 82380 and Nifty gains 169 points to 25239
  • China Masters badminton: PV Sindhu reaches second round but Ayush Shetty knocked out
  • World Wrestling Championships: Male wresters draw a blank and wone continue to struggle, showing that India is losing out in a sport where it once excelled
  • Speed Skating World Championships: Anandkumar Velkumar becomes the first Indian to win gold in 100m inline sprint. This comes after his bronze in the 500m event
  • BCCI ropes in Apollo Tyres as new jersey sponsor after Dream 11 had to bow out due to the ban on online gaming companies, to get Rs 200cr more
  • World Athletics: High jumper Sarvesh Anil Kushare finishes an impressive sixth
  • A study has found that the Red Fort in Delhi is turning black due to air pollution
  • PM Modi asks defence ministry to achieve greater integration among armed forces
  • Supreme Court refuses to stay the entire Waqf Act but stays some provisions it finds bad in law
  • Supreme Court closes Vantara zoo case in Jamnagar after the SIT clears the body tasked with maintaining it. Says it will entertain no further complaints in the matter
  • Supreme Court says bringing political parties under POSH Act will liekly become a tool for blackmail
Sebi dismisses Hindenberg's claim against Adani group companies ////// Neeraj Chopra finishes 8th at World Athletics
oppn parties
Hate Speech Case: Different Yardstick For Religious Leaders?

By Linus Garg
First publised on 2022-01-14 11:20:43

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Linus tackles things head-on. He takes sides in his analysis and it fits excellently with our editorial policy. No 'maybe's' and 'allegedly' for him, only things in black and white.

The Uttarakhand police have stirred into action in the Haridwar hate speech case after the Supreme Court issued a notice asking for an action taken report. But that this action is just to have something to put on paper before the court is obvious as till now they have only arrested Jitendra Narayan Singh Tiwari, alias Wasim Rizvi, one of the many accused in the case. Notably, they failed to arrest Yati Narshinghanand or Sadhvi Annapurna, the religious leaders mentioned in the FIR (although they have been summoned for questioning). This is despite the fact that when Tiwari was arrested, he was travelling with Narshinghanand and the latter even asked the police that why are they taking action only against Tiwari when he (Narshinghanand) is a co-accused.

One fails to understand what is stopping the police from arresting the other two when evidence in the form of widely circulated videos of the hate speech already exists in public domain. By arresting Tiwari alone, the police are discriminating as they should also have called him first for questioning as they have called Narshinghanand and Annapurna. Or are there different rules for religious leaders and others?

With the Supreme Court hearing the matter, it is just a matter of time before the police will have to conduct a thorough investigation and arrest the accused. Then even political backing will not be enough to shield them from arrest. That the accused have not applied for anticipatory bail just shows how secure they think they are by virtue of their connections and elevated status as religious leaders. But once the wheels of law start turning, they will not be spared.

What others have been arrested for under the sedition law seems childish when compared to the kind of inflammatory, divisive, hate-mongering and blatantly anti-national speeches made at the so-called Dharam Sansad in Haridwar. Calling for genocide of fellow citizens is like calling for civil war. Hopefully, the Supreme Court will punish the guilty as per the law of the land.