Court case(2021) 1 SCC 1

During a televised debate on the Places of Worship Act, the anchor Amish Devgan referred to the revered Sufi saint Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti of Ajmer as 'aakrantak' (invader or terrorist) and 'lootera' (plunderer). He later apologised, saying he had meant Alauddin Khilji. Several FIRs were registered in different States under sections 153A, 295A and 505 IPC. He sought quashing of the FIRs and, alternatively, their consolidation.

Sanjiv Khanna J declined to quash the FIRs but clubbed them for investigation at Ajmer, protecting the petitioner from arrest on cooperation. The judgment is a treatise on hate speech. Drawing on Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan (2014), the Law Commission's 267th Report and comparative law, the Court identified three elements, content, intent and harm or impact, to be assessed together, and applied a 'variable context' test: who the speaker is, what the audience is, and the circumstances. Speech by persons of influence, such as top political or social leaders and television anchors, has greater impact than that of an ordinary person, so a higher duty attaches to them. The Court distinguished speech that is merely offensive from speech that promotes hatred against a group identified by religion, caste or similar markers, and held that 'dignity' of the targeted group is a value protected by Articles 14 and 21. Prima facie the remarks could fall within sections 153A and 295A.