Karnataka Hate Speech Bill: Karnataka is the first state in India to introduce a bill specifically to curb hate speech. The Karnataka government is soon going to introduce ‘Hate Speech and Hate Crime (Prevention) Bill, 2025’ in the upcoming assembly session. In this proposed law, there is a provision of jail sentence ranging from two years to ten years for those who spread hatred. Besides, this law also introduces the concept of Collective Responsibility for organizations. Karnataka Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister HK Patil stressed the need for this law, saying that no existing law clearly deals with the problem of hate speech. This comment highlights India’s chronic legal deficiencies. Although the term ‘hate speech’ is often used by people, it has not yet been formally defined in the criminal laws of India.
Karnataka’s proposed bill appears to reflect the recommendations of the Law Commission and some of the concepts given in the Private Members Bill, 2022. According to the Karnataka Cabinet, the new bill defines hate speech as any expression that causes injury or causes hostility against any person or group on the basis of religion, race, caste, sex, sexual orientation, place of birth or disability. The inclusion of ‘sexual orientation’ and ‘gender’ expands the protected categories beyond those traditionally protected under the IPC and now under the BNS. A distinctive feature of the bill is collective liability. If hate speech is related to an organization, then people holding responsible positions in that organization can be held guilty. The bill also empowers the state to block or remove hateful content on the internet.
Current legal framework for hate speech
In the absence of any specific law, Indian law enforcement agencies use various provisions of the Indian Judicial Code to deal with cases related to hate speech. These sections are primarily to maintain public order, and not to punish hate speeches in a separate category. The most commonly used provision is Section 196, which is the successor to Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code. It provides for punishment for ‘promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc. and doing acts prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony’. However, statistics show that arrests are common, but convictions are rare. According to National Crime Records Bureau data mentioned in previous reports, the conviction rate under Section 153A in 2020 was only 20.2 percent.
What does Section 299 of BNS say?
Another BNS provision frequently used to deal with hate speech is Section 299, which punishes ‘deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage the religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs’. This is similar to Section 295A of IPC. Apart from this, Section 353 of BNS punishes such statements or false information which may induce or incite any person to commit an offense against the State or the community or to disturb public order. Each of these offenses is cognizable or cognizable. That means the police can arrest without warrant and there is a provision of punishment up to three years for this. Section 66A of the Information Technology Act was often used to crack down on online hate speech, until the Supreme Court struck it down in 2015 for being unconstitutionally vague.
In the last few years, the Supreme Court has taken a proactive stance on this issue, although this has changed. In October 2022, a bench of Justice KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy said that ‘an atmosphere of hatred is prevalent’ in the country. He directed the police chiefs of Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand to take suo motu action in hate speech cases without waiting for formal complaints. The court warned that any hesitation would be considered contempt. Later in April 2023, this directive was also implemented on all states and union territories. However, its practical implementation has proven challenging. In August 2023, a bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti, while hearing a case, observed that while defining hate speech is complex, the real problem in dealing with it lies in the implementation of the law and judicial decisions.
On November 25 this year, another bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta ruled that the apex court was ‘not inclined to monitor every incident of hate speech’. Citing the apex court’s 2018 Tehseen Poonawala judgment, the bench said that police stations and the High Court are capable of handling such cases, in which the appointment of nodal officers was mandatory to prevent mob violence and lynching.
Attempt to define hate speech
In its 267th report in March 2017, the Law Commission of India had recommended adding new sections – 153C and 505A – to the IPC to specifically criminalize inciting hatred and violence. In 2022, Bharat Rashtra Samithi MP K.R. Suresh Reddy introduced a private bill titled ‘Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill’ in the Rajya Sabha. The bill sought to define hate speech as any expression that ‘incites, justifies, promotes or spreads discrimination, hatred, hostility or violence against any person or group.’ It also proposes to define ‘hate crime’ as an offense motivated by prejudice against the victim’s actual or perceived status, including religion, race, gender identity or sexual orientation. It proposed deleting sections 153A and 295A of the Indian Penal Code in favor of these more specific provisions, but it was not passed.
