In this article, Karan Singh of Jindal Global Law School discusses the punishment for spreading religious hatred on social media.

The Purpose of religion is to control yourself, not to critics others.–  Dalai lama

Introduction

Religious hatred is a violence between different religious groups. Like we have racism which implies hate against someone’s race. Spreading religious hatred is very common these days. It can be through any mean like social media. In India, there have been many instances where religious hatred is turned into religious violence. Violence against Muslims in India or north-eastern is on rising. Social Media is a way to communicate a message to others. But some people make misuse of these social media by showing their hatred to other religion. In a world like this where groups are divided on the basis of religious makes hatred more for others.

In India, there are 9 religions in total. It is a land of different religions which are characterized by various religious practices.^[1]People of India have a strong belief in religion as they believe that these religions add purpose to their lives. Indians are so much connected to religion that they can do anything for their religion. India is the 4th worst country for religious violence. Hurting someone’s religion is a crime in India. The Government of India does understand the sentiments of people of India that is why rules and regulation are setups so that no-one hurts the sentiments of other religion. Punishment is also given for people who spread religious hatred either in public or on social media.

In 1984, Supreme Court decided to forfeit all the copies of book ‘Vishwa Jtibas’. This book contained derogatory references to Prophet Mohammad which outraged the religious feelings of the Muslims. The Supreme Court ordered to forfeit all the copies of the book keeping in mind the interest of the people.

Recently, Supreme Court has warned about the religious sensibility in India. A bench of Justices Dipak Misra, A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar stated that Insults to religion offered carelessly or without any intention to outrage the religious feelings of that class should not be charged with hurting religious.^[2] The Bench was hearing a case against the cricketer in which he hurled the sentiments of Hindu religion. Dhoni was seen on the cover page of the magazine as Lord Vishnu, holding a shoe in one hand.

Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal said that India does not intend to censor all the online social networks but the rules and regulation should be followed. Since 19 internet social media including Google, Yahoo and Facebook have been targeted in criminal and civil cases lodged in New Delhi Courts. Mostly, the cases are related to religious hatred. However, the court is holding the companies responsible for the derogatory words used by their users on their platforms.

The court has warned all the Social media to have a regular check or otherwise they have to pass an order for banning all such websites.^[3]

Position Of India

On Religious Hostilities, India Ranked Just Slightly Better Than Syria. India ranked fourth in the world in 2015 after Syria, Nigeria and Iraq in social hostilities involving religion. Interference from government and government restrictions on religion in India is high and is increasing every year. Government restrictions on religious practice in India was largely directed towards minorities. ^[4] In India, people tend to follow more religion than any other country. People of India is so connected with religion that sometimes they can insult other religions. Insulting another religion and showing hatred to other religion is very common in India. For that government has to interfere in between. Government has provided punishment so as to stop religious hatred.

A Facebook post can get you arrested

In our Constitution, a right to freedom of speech is given under Article 19(1)(a). It states that every citizen shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression. Protection of certain rights are given to every citizen but it does not mean that you misuse this right to hurt others religion. Article 19(2) defines all the exception when the freedom of speech ad expression won’t work.  Article 19 (1)(a) gives right of freedom of speech and expression subject to ‘reasonable restriction”. Reasonable restrictions can be for preserving public order, decency or morality.

Generally Speaking, article 19 gives right to freedom of speech but you can not speak against anyone religion as this can hurt our religion and can lead to indecency. And the government can make any law so as to preserve public order, decency, and morality.

There have been so many instances where people have shown hatred toward each other’s religion especially on social media like Facebook, Tweeter, etc.

People have landed in jail before of a Facebook post. Recently, Rahat Khan was arrested by UP police for a posting a Facebook post against the new UP CM Adityanath. In March 2015, a class 12th student was arrested for posting objectionable comments on UP minister Azam Khan.

In 2014, a man from Kerala was arrested for posting abusive comments and photos on Facebook about Prime Minister Narender Modi.

In November 2012, two girls were arrested for posting a question on her Facebook page questioning why this city was shut down for Shiv Sena leader Bal Thackeray’s funeral. One of them commented that the shutdown was out of fear, not respect. The second girl was arrested for liking the post.

They were booked under section 295(a) of the IPC for “hurting religious sentiments” and Section 66a of the IT Act.

This raised a question on whether there is a right of freedom of speech or not in India.

Know the Laws related to social media and religion

Section 153A of IPC

Section 153A of IPC states that whoever promotes enmity between different groups of religion and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony will face punishment. Whoever

1. By words, either spoken or written or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise promotes religion disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious or
2. Commits any act which is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony between different religious and which disturbs or is likely to disturb the public tranquillity shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years or with fine or with both.^[5]

Section 295A of IPC

Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.

Whoever with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of citizen of India by words, or by signs or by visible representations insults to attempts to insult the religions or the religious belief of that class shall be punished with imprisonment of either description of a term which may extend to 3 years or with fine or with both.

This provision was introduced in 1927 as to protect the religious feeling which was hurt by a published a book called “Rangila Rasul”. The book contained the marriage and sex life of Prophet Muhammed. There was no provision against the insult of religion, so the publisher was released. But the published was killed later by Ilm-ud-din. The killer was honored and called Shaheed. The Indian Muslim demanded provision against the insult of religious feelings. Hence, section 295A was introduced by the government.^[6]

Also, this provision was declared constitutionally valid in Ramji Lal Modi v State of UP, a five-judge bench of the supreme court upheld its constitutionality under Article 19. That means that now for making it unconstitutional, a seven-judge bench is required. To make it unconstitutional means you should have a strong and compelling reason.

Section 298 of the IPC

Any person uttering words etc with deliberate intent to hurt the religious feelings of any person will be punished under this section. Whoever, with the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of any person, utters any word or makes any sound in the hearing of that person or makes any gesture in the sight of that person or places, any object in the sight of that person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both. ^[7]

Section 66A of IT Act

Section 66A of the IT Act states the punishment for sending offensive messages through communication services etc. Any person who sends any information which is offensive or any information which he knows to be false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred or ill will, persistently by making use of such computer resource or a communication device. This section is only through communication services like social media. This section provides punishment with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine.

But this provision is scrapped by Supreme Court. As this section was unconstitutional. In 2015, Section 66A of IT Act was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. The court struck down Section 66A of the IT Act for being “open ended, undefined, and vague”.^[8]

Conclusion

Hate Speech on Social Media is the easiest way to show hatred toward other’s religion. But punishment that is given under the IPC makes it difficult. Showing hatred toward someone’s religion is not acceptable anywhere in the world. If the someone is following a religion then let we can’t stop them as the Constitution of India allows them to. Hate Speech can lead to many dangerous situations like rioting, war, strikes etc. We should not talk about anyone’s religion on Social Media. Instead SPREAD LOVE, NOT HATRED.

References

^[1] http://www.mapsofindia.com/maps/india/religionsinindia.htm

^[2]http://www.huffingtonpost.in/2017/04/21/stop-misusing-law-against-hurting-religious-sentiments-says-sup_a_22050257/

^[3]http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/no-censorship-for-social-media-but-laws-must-be-followed-sibal-569120

^[4]http://www.huffingtonpost.in/2017/04/13/on-religious-hostilities-india-ranked-just-slightly-better-than_a_22037994/

^[5] Section 153(a) of Indian Penal Code,1860

^[6] Section 295(a) of Indian Penal Code, 1860

^[7] Section 298 of Indian Penal Code, 1860

^[8] Section 66A of Information Technology Act