The Supreme Court made significant remarks during the hearing of a cartoonist's anticipatory bail plea, who was arrested for allegedly creating offensive cartoons of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has made important observations in a case involving a cartoonist accused of creating objectionable and offensive cartoons of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). While hearing the anticipatory bail plea of the accused cartoonist, the court stated that such behavior harms harmony and peace in society. The court has not granted any relief to the cartoonist for now, and the hearing in the case has been adjourned until Tuesday.
What is the whole case about?
The entire controversy began when a cartoonist was accused of sharing objectionable and offensive cartoons against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the RSS on social media. Protests were witnessed across the country regarding these cartoons, and the concerned state police registered a case under the IT Act and sections of the Indian Penal Code and arrested the accused. Now, the accused in this case has filed an anticipatory bail petition in the Supreme Court, which was heard in the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court's Strict Remarks
During the hearing on Monday, a bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Arvind Kumar expressed displeasure over the cartoonist's behavior. The court said in b terms, "Why do you do all this? Look at the attitude of these people, they have no sensitivity. Later, they say, apologize and end the case. This attitude is not right. Because of such people, the harmony of the country is disturbed."
The court also said that "such cartoons harm mutual brotherhood and social harmony in the country." The court clarified that it is not providing any relief for now.
What arguments were presented by the cartoonist?
Senior advocate Vrinda Grover appeared on behalf of the cartoonist in this case. She said, "Suppose the cartoon is bad or poor, but is it a crime? It can be objectionable at most, but it is not legally appropriate to consider it a crime. I am not trying to justify anything, but I am talking within the ambit of the law." She also told the court that her client is ready to remove the disputed cartoon.
During the hearing, the Supreme Court clearly stated, "Later, they come and say, apologize and end the case. This attitude is not right. People are spoiling the atmosphere of the country by misusing social media. There is a thing called responsibility in law and society."
