Nagpur: In a landmark judgment, the Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court ruled that criticizing the caste reservation system on WhatsApp does not constitute hate speech or violate Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Upholding the discharge of a woman and her father in a case filed by her estranged partner, Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke emphasized that criticism of policies, even if harsh, does not equate to promoting enmity against SC/ST members.
"The messages of the respondent woman only show feelings expressed on caste reservation system Such messages nowhere show there was any attempt to promote any enmity or hatred or ill-will against SC/ST members. At the most, it can be said her target was just the complainant only," the judge said.
The case arose from a failed relationship between a 29-year-old software engineer and a 28-year-old woman from Madhya Pradesh. The two secretly married while in college, but their relationship soured when the woman discovered her husband belonged to the chambhar community.
Subsequently, the woman sent WhatsApp messages expressing her opposition to the caste reservation system. Her estranged husband alleged these messages were derogatory, humiliating, and violated provisions under Sections 3(1)(u) and 3(1)(v) of Atrocities Act. He also implicated her father in the complaint.
The trial court discharged the accused daughter and father duo in 2021, prompting the complainant to challenge the decision in high court. Justice Joshi-Phalke rejected the appeal, stating the woman's messages did not incite enmity or ill-will against SC/ST members. "The messages reflect her opinion on the caste reservation system. At most, her criticism was directed at the complainant and the reservation policy. Such expressions, even if strongly worded, cannot be equated to hate speech targeting an entire community," the judge said.
While highlighting the intent behind the SC/ST Act, the court noted the law aims to protect vulnerable communities from systemic humiliation and discrimination. "The legislation is designed to address indignities suffered by SC/ST individuals due to their caste. However, in this case, there is no prima facie evidence to suggest the accused attempted to incite hatred or ill-will against SC/ST members," Justice Joshi-Phalke said.
The HC upheld the trial court's decision, dismissing the complainant's appeal under Section 14A of Atrocities Act. The judge ruled the messages, though critical of reservations, did not violate any provisions of the Act. "Freedom of expression includes the right to critique policies. To invoke the Atrocities Act, there must be a clear intent to promote ill-will or hatred, which is absent in this case," she concluded, while dismissing the man's appeal.