<p>The Supreme Court on Friday said anybody indulging in hate speech has to be dealt with in accordance with law and all the sides have to be treated alike.</p><p>On being told that hate speech was made at Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) rally, the bench emphasised that the court is very clear that both sides are to be treated alike. </p><p>“We are very clear, be it one side or other side, they all have to be treated alike. If anybody indulges in anything which we know is hate speech, they will be dealt with as per law. It is something in which we have already expressed our opinion. I don’t think we have to repeat,” Justice Khanna said.</p>.Definition of hate speech complex, real problem is implementation and execution of law: Supreme Court.<p>At the beginning of the hearing in a batch of matters connected to hate speech, the bench said they have gone through the guidelines passed in Tehseen Poonawalla judgement (2018) and hoped that they are being complied with.</p><p>Additional Solicitor General K M Nataraj appeared for the Centre in the case. A counsel said that there was a rally conducted by Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) where a slogan of “death to Hindus” was raised. At this, advocate Nizam Pasha, appearing for Kerala-based Shaheen Abdullah said there is no side to hate speech and "all of us are on the same side". </p><p>The counsel, who made claims of hate speech at the IUML rally, however, said Pasha was not bringing full facts before the apex court. After hearing brief submissions, the bench put the matter for hearing on next Friday.</p><p>The court was hearing a plea seeking action against calls made by several groups for boycott of Muslims following Nuh-Gurugram communal violence in Haryana. The application was filed by journalist Shaheen Abdullah.</p><p>On August 11, the court had asked the Centre to constitute a committee to look into the cases of hate speech saying that there has to be harmony and comity between communities, and all communities are responsible and nobody can accept hate speech.</p><p>The bench had noted that coming to courts is not a solution, while emphasising on an in-built mechanism to deal with the problem of 'hate speech'. </p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Friday said anybody indulging in hate speech has to be dealt with in accordance with law and all the sides have to be treated alike.</p><p>On being told that hate speech was made at Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) rally, the bench emphasised that the court is very clear that both sides are to be treated alike. </p><p>“We are very clear, be it one side or other side, they all have to be treated alike. If anybody indulges in anything which we know is hate speech, they will be dealt with as per law. It is something in which we have already expressed our opinion. I don’t think we have to repeat,” Justice Khanna said.</p>.Definition of hate speech complex, real problem is implementation and execution of law: Supreme Court.<p>At the beginning of the hearing in a batch of matters connected to hate speech, the bench said they have gone through the guidelines passed in Tehseen Poonawalla judgement (2018) and hoped that they are being complied with.</p><p>Additional Solicitor General K M Nataraj appeared for the Centre in the case. A counsel said that there was a rally conducted by Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) where a slogan of “death to Hindus” was raised. At this, advocate Nizam Pasha, appearing for Kerala-based Shaheen Abdullah said there is no side to hate speech and "all of us are on the same side". </p><p>The counsel, who made claims of hate speech at the IUML rally, however, said Pasha was not bringing full facts before the apex court. After hearing brief submissions, the bench put the matter for hearing on next Friday.</p><p>The court was hearing a plea seeking action against calls made by several groups for boycott of Muslims following Nuh-Gurugram communal violence in Haryana. The application was filed by journalist Shaheen Abdullah.</p><p>On August 11, the court had asked the Centre to constitute a committee to look into the cases of hate speech saying that there has to be harmony and comity between communities, and all communities are responsible and nobody can accept hate speech.</p><p>The bench had noted that coming to courts is not a solution, while emphasising on an in-built mechanism to deal with the problem of 'hate speech'. </p>
