New Delhi, July 14 — The Supreme Court on Monday said the constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression was being “abused,” as it heard the anticipatory bail plea of cartoonist Hemant Malviya, booked for sharing cartoons targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) workers on social media.
A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Aravind Kumar questioned the motives behind the posts while hearing arguments from Malviya’s counsel. “Why do you do all this?” the bench asked, addressing the nature of the content shared.
Malviya has challenged a July 3 order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court denying him pre-arrest protection. The case stems from an FIR registered by Lasudiya police in Indore, following a complaint by advocate and RSS worker Vinay Joshi. The complaint accuses Malviya of uploading material that allegedly insulted Hindu religious sentiments and disturbed communal harmony.
The FIR cites several cartoons, videos, and comments deemed offensive—among them alleged remarks about Lord Shiva and content perceived to malign Modi and RSS affiliates. Malviya has been booked under sections 196, 299, and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, relating to communal harmony and religious insult, in addition to section 67-A of the Information Technology Act concerning sexually explicit digital content.
Advocate Vrinda Grover, representing Malviya, told the court the post in question dated back to the Covid-19 pandemic in 2021. “It may be unpalatable… Let me say it is in poor taste. But is it an offence? My lords have said it can be offensive, but that does not make it a crime. I am simply on the point of law,” she submitted.
Grover maintained that Malviya had posted a cartoon, not responsible for the comments others left on it. She noted the absence of any law-and-order disruption since the post was made, and framed the issue as one of individual liberty. “Should this require arrest and remand?” she asked, urging the court to consider interim protection.
Justice Dhulia, reacting to her argument, remarked, “Whatever we may do with this case, this is definitely one where the freedom of speech and expression is being abused.”
Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, appearing for the Madhya Pradesh government, said such instances were not isolated. “It is not the question of maturity alone,” he responded when Grover called for mature engagement. “It is something more.”
The bench posted the matter for further hearing on July 15. Grover’s plea for interim relief was acknowledged, but no decision was made. “We will see this tomorrow,” the court said.
Malviya maintains he merely shared a political cartoon. His legal team continues to argue that criticism, however sharp, does not constitute criminal conduct under constitutional guarantees of free expression.
