Free speech not to be exercised only if in line with majority: Delhi HC

HC said rights guaranteed by the Constitution, including free speech, cannot be restricted or denied on perceived apprehension of being unpalatable

The Delhi High Court has said free speech is not to be exercised only if it falls in line with the majoritarian view as the right to dissent is the essence of a vibrant democracy.

Rejecting a plea to stop the publication, circulation and sale of Congress leader Salman Khurshid's book, Justice Yashwant Varma said rights guaranteed by the Constitution, including free speech, cannot be restricted or denied on perceived apprehension of being unpalatable and a democracy governed by the rule of law would be placed in serious peril if creative voices were stifled or intellectual freedom is suppressed.

A lawyer, Vineed Jindal filed the plea claiming the book "Sunrise Over Ayodhya: Nationhood In Our Times" "impinges upon the faith of others" for comparing Hindutva to radical groups like ISIS and Boko Haram.

In his six-page order, the judge quoted Voltaire, "While I wholly disagree of what you say, I will defend to the death your right to say it" and said that free speech "must be zealously protected" unless the work conclusively falls foul of the constitutional or statutory restrictions.

Also read: BJP govt in Madhya Pradesh to get Salman Khurshid's book banned, says Narottam Mishra

"The right to dissent or to have and express a contrarian view with respect to current affairs or historical events are the essence of a vibrant democracy. That fundamental and precious right guaranteed by our Constitution can neither be restricted nor denied merely on the perceived apprehension of the view being unpalatable or disagreeable to some. The freedom to freely express ideas and opinions cannot be permitted to be overshadowed by the ominous cloud of being non-conformist," the court said in its order passed on November 25.

"The freedom to freely express ideas and opinions cannot be permitted to be overshadowed by the ominous cloud of being non-conformist," it added.

In the present case, the book in its entirety was not even placed before the court for its consideration, the court noted.

Check out the latest DH videos: