Hate Speech On Social Media Platforms
✅ I. What is Hate Speech?
Hate speech refers to speech that targets individuals or groups based on religion, caste, ethnicity, gender, or other identities — especially when it incites violence, discrimination, or hostility.
On Social Media, hate speech may include:
Inciting communal violence
Spreading misinformation targeting communities
Offensive memes, slurs, and doctored videos
Calls for genocide or exclusion
II. Relevant Legal Provisions in India
| Law | Section | What it Covers |
|---|---|---|
| IPC, 1860 | Section 153A | Promoting enmity between groups |
| Section 295A | Insulting religious beliefs | |
| Section 505(1)(b) | Statements inciting public mischief | |
| Section 124A | Sedition (used rarely, now under review) | |
| IT Act, 2000 | Section 66A (struck down) | Was used for offensive messages |
| Section 69A | Blocking access to online content |
Even though Section 66A of the IT Act was struck down in 2015 (Shreya Singhal case), other sections of IPC and IT Act are used for social media hate speech cases.
III. Landmark Indian Case Laws on Hate Speech (esp. on Social Media)
Let’s go through more than five important cases:
1. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, (2015) 5 SCC 1
Facts:
Two girls were arrested under Section 66A IT Act for a Facebook post criticizing a city-wide bandh after Bal Thackeray’s death.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court struck down Section 66A as unconstitutional for being vague and violating free speech under Article 19(1)(a).
Relevance:
Clarified that only speech inciting violence or creating public disorder can be criminalized — protected opinion is not hate speech.
2. Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan v. Union of India, (2014) 11 SCC 477
Facts:
A PIL was filed asking for stronger laws against hate speech, especially by politicians.
Judgment:
The SC declined to frame new laws but directed strict enforcement of existing laws, including IPC provisions like 153A, 295A, etc.
Significance:
Highlighted that hate speech law enforcement applies equally to speech online.
3. Amitabh Thakur v. Union of India, Allahabad HC, 2018
Facts:
A Facebook post was made inciting communal violence during elections.
Judgment:
The High Court upheld the FIR under Sections 153A and 295A IPC, emphasizing police duty to act swiftly against online hate speech.
Key Point:
Hate speech online can’t be excused as mere opinion if it promotes enmity or incites violence.
4. Tehseen S. Poonawalla v. Union of India, (2018) 9 SCC 501
Facts:
Related to lynchings across India following viral hate messages spread via WhatsApp and Facebook.
Judgment:
SC ordered:
Creation of fast-track courts for hate crimes,
Appointment of nodal officers in every district to monitor social media,
Strict action against fake news and incitement.
Relevance:
Directly addressed the dangers of unchecked hate speech and misinformation on social media.
5. Sabu Mathew George v. Union of India, (2017) 2 SCC 514
Facts:
Concerned online platforms displaying sex determination ads (banned under PCPNDT Act), which could promote gender-based discrimination.
Judgment:
SC held Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft liable to take down such content.
Key Principle:
Social media platforms have a duty to regulate illegal and discriminatory content.
6. Faisal v. State of Uttar Pradesh, Allahabad HC, 2020
Facts:
A man was arrested for uploading an inflammatory video on TikTok with communal overtones.
Judgment:
Court denied bail, holding that online hate speech has serious potential to disturb public peace.
Significance:
Reaffirmed that intent and impact matter more than platform used.
7. Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India, 2021 (Ongoing PIL)
Facts:
Petitioner sought stricter hate speech laws and a clear definition in context of social media.
Current Status:
SC has issued notices to the government, pending further action.
Potential Impact:
May lead to codified definition of hate speech in India.
IV. Summary of Legal Principles from Cases
| Principle | Case Reference |
|---|---|
| Speech must incite violence or public disorder to be restricted | Shreya Singhal |
| Social media speech is subject to same hate speech laws | Pravasi Bhalai, Faisal |
| Platforms must take down unlawful content | Sabu Mathew George |
| Hate speech on social media can lead to criminal prosecution | Amitabh Thakur, Tehseen Poonawalla |
| Government must enforce existing laws before making new ones | Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan |
V. Enforcement Challenges
Vague laws (e.g., overuse of Section 153A).
Lack of digital literacy among law enforcement.
Tension between free speech and regulation.
Global platforms vs Indian laws (e.g., Twitter, YouTube).
VI. Way Forward Suggested by Courts
Nodal officers to monitor hate speech.
Use of AI and moderation tools.
Public awareness campaigns.
Stronger training for cybercrime units.
VII. Quick Recap
✅ Hate speech is restricted when it incites violence, enmity, or public disorder.
🛑 Social media is not a free zone — all laws apply.
⚖️ Several courts have upheld prosecution under IPC for hateful online posts.
📱 Platforms may be liable to take down illegal content.
🔍 Courts are pushing for better enforcement, not necessarily new laws.
RELATED Blog
0 comments