Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed before the Bombay High Court seeks guidelines to prevent the circulation of derogatory remarks against Mahatma Gandhi and other revered figures on social media platforms.

The petitioner, Sandip Marve, is the trustee secretary of Maharashtra Gandhi Samrak Nidhi (MGSN).

The PIL claims that the petitioner encountered a video on a social media platform featuring Hindu activist Sambhaji Bhide making derogatory remarks about Mahatma Gandhi's father, suggesting he was in the employment of a rich Muslim Watandar and committed theft before fleeing. Bhide implied that Gandhi's mother was taken to the Muslim Watandar's house, insinuating that Gandhi was Muslim.

The petition also argues that the court should permit followers of the deceased individual to file a defamation case, as per the Indian Penal Code (IPC), since currently, only close relatives of the deceased person have the right to file such a case

“It may also be held that after demise of the person any person who is the followers of the dead is also relative of that person and therefore would have the locus standi to filed the criminal complaint and to that extent the provision of Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code to the extent to which it provide that complaint can be filed only by closed relative may be declared as unconditional being violative of Article 21 of the Dead person being violative of Article 21 of a living followers like the Petitioners and being manifestly arbitrary and therefore violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India,” the plea states.

The PIL also urges the court to invalidate and strike down certain provisions of sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that contain the words "and is intended to be hurtful to the feelings of his family or other near relatives," as it is considered a violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

Additionally, it seeks the court's intervention to identify deceased individuals who are highly esteemed by various groups in the State and create a list of such individuals.

The PIL further prays before the court to issue directives prohibiting the publication of derogatory remarks about any of these respected individuals by the press or on any social media platforms.

The petition highlights that deceased individuals were unable to defend themselves against the derogatory remarks, and their heirs chose to overlook the "hurt and insult" caused by such comments.

“They are many persons who belong to the very same religion race, caste, sex, or the group to which the persons who makes utterances belong to and although they belong to such group they actually do not want to share such type of utterances and such type of derogatory remarks but unfortunately either they are not strong enough to voice their concems or they feel that even if they are right, majority of the group to which they belong may not like them criticizing the person who have made such derogatory remarks,” the plea reads.

Case title: Kumar Saptarshi & Ors vs State of Maharashtra & Ors