HC asks Mumbai, MBVV police chiefs to examine alleged hate speeches

Bombay HC directs police commissioners to review alleged hate speeches by BJP MLAs Nitish Rane, Geeta Jain, and Telangana legislator T Raja Singh. FIR decision pending.

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Monday directed the commissioners of police of Mumbai and Mira-Bhayandar, Vasai-Virar (MBVV) to personally review recordings and transcripts of alleged hate speeches by BJP MLAs Nitish Rane and Geeta Jain, and Telangana legislator T Raja Singh; and inform the court if an FIR would be registered against them.

HT Image

The court was hearing petitions filed by five Mumbai residents seeking registration of criminal cases against Rane, Jain and Singh for alleged hate speeches in Mira Road during communal unrest in January 2024. The petitioners, including two victims of the violence, approached the court through advocate Vijay Hiremath citing the lack of first information reports (FIRs) filed by the police against the three leaders.

According to the petition, violence erupted in a minority-dominated locality in Mira Road on January 21, 2024, which spread across the town. Rane and Jain reportedly visited parts of Mira Road during this period and delivered speeches openly threatening the minority community; Singh allegedly delivered an incendiary speech during a rally on February 25.

The petition claimed that Rane visited other suburbs of Mumbai such as Govandi and Malvani, delivering more hate speeches. Despite citizens’ requests, the local police allegedly failed to act and register FIRs against the MLAs.

The petitioners argued that the police’s failure to act on citizens’ complaints violated the mandate of the supreme court, which requires authorities to take suo motu action in registering FIRs against hate speeches regardless of the speaker’s religion. The petition highlighted the police’s inaction in registering FIRs despite media reports on the matter.

During Monday’s hearing, chief public prosecutor Hiten Venegavkar, representing the state police, informed the court that no FIR was filed since there wasn’t sufficient material to constitute hate speech. “Merely referring to a community doesn’t amount to hate speech,” he stated.

The bench comprising justices Revati Mohite Dere and Manjusha Deshpande, acknowledged the importance of freedom of speech, but said it “comes with some restrictions”.

The petitioners, represented by senior advocate Gayatri Singh, advocate Vijay Hiremath, and advocate Hamza Lakdawala reiterated allegations that Singh categorically targeted minorities during his February 25 speech. They highlighted an upcoming event, organised by the same group as the earlier rally, on April 17, coinciding with Ram Navami, and urged the court to prevent any untoward incident.

Subsequently, the court directed the police to take necessary preventive action to ensure there is no communal disharmony and law and order situation on April 17. It reprimanded the police – likening it to ‘mute spectators’, it said, “You wait for the crime to be committed and then file an FIR.”

In response, Venegavkar assured the court, “We will give all protection and in case of hate speech, we will take necessary action.”

The court also expressed concern over Rane using the press room and the office of the commissioner of police, MBVV, on January 23 to deliver hate speeches. “If timely action was not taken against those who violate the law, the citizens would lose faith in the police,” the bench observed. The next hearing is scheduled on April 15.