Judicial Sensitivity to Sentiments: A Step Back : The Hindu Editorial 9 June 2025 - SST ONLY

Latest

Welcome to Sst Only! I provide study material for Class 9 and 10 Social Science and Humanities for Classes 11 and 12. Simplifying complex concepts, I cover history, geography, political science, economics, and more. Join me to make learning enjoyable and accessible!

Monday, June 9, 2025

Judicial Sensitivity to Sentiments: A Step Back : The Hindu Editorial 9 June 2025

 

THE HINDU EDITORIAL SIMPLIFIED

Judicial Sensitivity to Sentiments: A Step Back


Courts and Free Speech

  • Courts are no longer strongly protecting free speech.

  • Article 19(1)(a) was meant to let people speak freely, even if speech is provocative or offensive.

  • Now, courts focus more on civility and emotions than protecting rights.


Growing Influence of Hurt Sentiments

  • Courts are punishing speech based on hurt feelings, not on whether it causes real harm.

  • This leads to a dangerous trend where public outrage controls freedom.


Real Cases Showing the Problem

1. Social Media Criticism

  • A young man posted against PM Modi after Operation Sindoor.

  • The court said he hurt emotions and allowed a case to continue.

2. Kamal Haasan's Statement

  • He said Kannada is like a daughter to Tamil.

  • Court asked him to apologize, instead of checking if the speech broke any law.

3. Podcast Language Case

  • A content creator used explicit words.

  • Court focused on vulgarity, not whether the speech caused harm.

4. Professor’s Tweet

  • A historian questioned the use of a woman soldier in a war message.

  • He was dragged into court for hurting feelings.


Two Main Problems

  1. Speech = Harm
    Courts are wrongly treating emotional reaction as legal harm.

  2. Encouraging Outrage
    The more people get offended, the more speech gets challenged in court.


Free Speech and the State

  • Courts refused to stop cases against leaders like Rahul Gandhi for army-related comments.

  • In another case, someone calling the PM a “coward” was charged under harsh laws.

  • Police cases themselves act like punishment, even without a conviction.


Apologies as a Legal Tool

  • Courts are pushing people to apologize, even when speech is legal.

  • This gives more power to angry mobs than to the Constitution.


What Should Be Done

  • Courts should protect free speech, not people’s feelings.

  • Laws like sedition are often misused and need stricter checks.

  • Apologies should be personal choices, not legal demands.


Final Message

  • Democracies must allow disagreement and bold speech.

  • Courts should defend the right to speak, not protect people from being offended.

  • India’s freedom was built by people who dared to speak out, not by those who stayed polite.


“The world owes much to rebels who would dare to argue… and insist the pontiff is not infallible.” — Dr. B.R. Ambedkar



Simplified By: Shivam Saxena  

No comments:

Post a Comment