📌 ReadyIAS Daily Mains Practice
Join our Structured Answer Writing Program: https://www.readyias.com/enroll-now
💬 Queries/Help: https://t.me/ReadyiasTeam
#Day3 – GS2 | Constitution & Judiciary
Q. Disturbing public order or inciting violence cannot be allowed under the garb of the freedom of speech and expression. Discuss with the help of the recent Supreme Court judgment on hate speech. (250 words)
✅ Directive & Syllabus Scope
Directive: Discuss – present key dimensions with legal and constitutional backing
GS2 Syllabus: Indian Constitution – Fundamental Rights; Public Order; Hate Speech; Judiciary
📝 Model Answer
🔹 Introduction
The Indian Constitution guarantees freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a), but Article 19(2) allows the state to impose reasonable restrictions for maintaining public order. Hate speech, which disrupts harmony, falls outside the protective scope of free expression.
🔹 Constitutional and Legal Context
Public Order as a Limitation: Speech leading to violence, communal disharmony, or incitement is not protected.
Section 153A and 295A of IPC: Criminalize hate speech that promotes enmity or insults religious sentiments.
🔹 Supreme Court Interventions
Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan v. Union of India (2014):
Recognized the danger of hate speech; urged the legislature to enact stricter laws.
Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015):
Clarified that only speech leading to incitement of violence can be curtailed.
Amish Devgan v. Union of India (2020):
Distinguished between free speech and hate speech based on context, intent, and likely impact.
Shaheen Abdulla v. Union of India (2023):
Directed suo motu registration of FIRs for hate speech. Held that selective inaction violates constitutional principles.
🔹 Way Forward
Strengthen independent enforcement of existing laws
Encourage responsible speech in public discourse
Ensure non-partisan action against all forms of hate, irrespective of origin
🔹 Conclusion
The Supreme Court has drawn a clear line: Freedom of speech cannot shield hate or harm. Safeguarding constitutional values requires upholding both liberty and law.
🎯 Write daily. Think like a topper. Be Mains Ready with ReadyIAS.
👉 Join Now: https://www.readyias.com/enroll-now
#GS2 #FreedomOfSpeech #HateSpeech #PublicOrder #SupremeCourt #Judiciary #UPSCMains #ReadyIAS #MainsReady #Day3
Join our Structured Answer Writing Program: https://www.readyias.com/enroll-now
💬 Queries/Help: https://t.me/ReadyiasTeam
#Day3 – GS2 | Constitution & Judiciary
Q. Disturbing public order or inciting violence cannot be allowed under the garb of the freedom of speech and expression. Discuss with the help of the recent Supreme Court judgment on hate speech. (250 words)
✅ Directive & Syllabus Scope
Directive: Discuss – present key dimensions with legal and constitutional backing
GS2 Syllabus: Indian Constitution – Fundamental Rights; Public Order; Hate Speech; Judiciary
📝 Model Answer
🔹 Introduction
The Indian Constitution guarantees freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a), but Article 19(2) allows the state to impose reasonable restrictions for maintaining public order. Hate speech, which disrupts harmony, falls outside the protective scope of free expression.
🔹 Constitutional and Legal Context
Public Order as a Limitation: Speech leading to violence, communal disharmony, or incitement is not protected.
Section 153A and 295A of IPC: Criminalize hate speech that promotes enmity or insults religious sentiments.
🔹 Supreme Court Interventions
Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan v. Union of India (2014):
Recognized the danger of hate speech; urged the legislature to enact stricter laws.
Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015):
Clarified that only speech leading to incitement of violence can be curtailed.
Amish Devgan v. Union of India (2020):
Distinguished between free speech and hate speech based on context, intent, and likely impact.
Shaheen Abdulla v. Union of India (2023):
Directed suo motu registration of FIRs for hate speech. Held that selective inaction violates constitutional principles.
🔹 Way Forward
Strengthen independent enforcement of existing laws
Encourage responsible speech in public discourse
Ensure non-partisan action against all forms of hate, irrespective of origin
🔹 Conclusion
The Supreme Court has drawn a clear line: Freedom of speech cannot shield hate or harm. Safeguarding constitutional values requires upholding both liberty and law.
🎯 Write daily. Think like a topper. Be Mains Ready with ReadyIAS.
👉 Join Now: https://www.readyias.com/enroll-now
#GS2 #FreedomOfSpeech #HateSpeech #PublicOrder #SupremeCourt #Judiciary #UPSCMains #ReadyIAS #MainsReady #Day3