Twitter
Advertisement

Can the law really block out Praveen Togadia?

The ban on his Kandhamal visit is legally sustainable, but that doesn't mean he has given up on provocation.

Latest News
article-main
The Bangalore police barred Togadia's entry into the city from February 5 to 11, because he could stir up trouble.
FacebookTwitterWhatsappLinkedin

These days, Praveen Togadia has reason to have a grouse against various state governments and their police. The International President of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad might even have reasons to feel that his fundamental rights to freedom of expression and of assembly are being violated. Because of late, the governments of Karnataka, Assam, and most recently, Orissa, have declared their strong refusal to allow him into their territories. 

The Police Superintendent of Kandhamal has used his powers under Section 144(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to bar Togadia from attending the golden jubilee celebrations of the VHP, although the programme, slated for this Saturday, has been allowed to go on. In 2008, Kandhamal had witnessed gruesome communal violence against the mainly tribal population of Christians, and bearing that in mind, especially in the present times of ghar wapsi, the authorities have thought it best to keep out the man infamous for his inflammatory speeches geared to provoke religious hate and consequent violence. 

Local Christian groups are heaving a sigh of relief, but the VHP is smarting, and has accused the government of using repressive, and illegal tactics. Others, notably civil libertarians, have been quick to condemn this, contending that prior restraint is undemocratic and unconstitutional. 

What the law states

Regarding known purveyors of hate speech, the law is quite clear: the courts wouldn't normally step into the shoes of the executive- that is, the government and the police and decide, on their behalf, who to ban from speaking or giving vent to his opinions, howsoever odious they might be. 

In 2013, while declining to intervene in a PIL demanding a complete ban on Guru Poojas and processions being conducted and brought out by caste, religious and "communal" organisations, the Madras High Court had ruled that the police and the state as well as city administration were vested with ample powers to control the outbreak of communal clashes arising from those marches and ceremonies. Not only that, the police was also adequately empowered to take pre-emptive action if the circumstances so demanded. The judiciary would only step in when a case was made out against prima facie government's high-handedness, disproportionate action in respect of an actual or perceived threat to communal peace and the law and order situation. 

Earlier, on 31 March 2004, the Supreme Court delivered a ruling on similar lines, in a case which involved Togadia. The Additional District Magistrate had clamped prohibitory orders in an area where Togadia was to address a gathering. The VHP appealed against this to the High Court, and the judges had held that the potential addressees were not so fickle of mind as to be swayed by a hate speech. Even if they were, the court said, the government had no right to act on a mere presumption. 

The Supreme Court differed. While agreeing that the judiciary should be circumspect in these matters, the court was clear- while deciding whether to ban or not, a person's antecedents were of significant importance, and must be properly considered. 

It is here that Togadia's reputation, rather, notoriety, as a rabid hatemonger, precedes him by a mile. And it would require a leap of logic to contend that he doesn't pose any reasonable apprehension of harm in Kandhamal. 

A legal conundrum

Togadia, ever persistent in his pursuit, recently presented the authorities and the law with a situation which is more complex than one would have wished.

The Bangalore police barred his entry into the city from February 5 to 11, because he could stir up trouble. MN Reddi, the Commissioner of Police, was of the firm opinion that given his past, even Togadia's presence was something the city and its denizens could do without. Perhaps he hadn't reckoned with the man's ingenuity. On 8 February, via video conference, Togadia addressed the gathering at the Virat Hindu Samajothsava, where he demanded that the ghar wapsi programmes needed to be speeded up, and also called for a "constitutional Hindu nation" (whatever that means).

The police promptly registered FIRs against him and the organisers, for violating the ban. But that action is constitutionally suspect. It's one thing to legally prevent a person from standing atop a podium and pouring vitriol against minority communities, and another to book him for a speech delivered on a screen, in a packed auditorium where policemen were keeping watch outside. Would the audience be sufficiently roused to rush out of the hall, grab swords and trishuls, and go on a killing spree? 

The police has its task cut out, but Togadia is surely enjoying the limelight and legal squabbles.

Find your daily dose of news & explainers in your WhatsApp. Stay updated, Stay informed-  Follow DNA on WhatsApp.
Advertisement

Live tv

Advertisement
Advertisement