Justice Ujjal Bhuyan stressed that a mature democracy must display confidence in its foundational values rather than react to creative expression with suspicion.
Pertinently, he also said that it will be violative of the Constitution to target any particular community on the basis of religion, language, caste or region.
This is particularly true for public figures occupying high constitutional office who have taken the solemn oath to uphold the Constitution, the judge underscored.
“It is therefore constitutionally impermissible for anybody, be it the State or non-state actors, through any medium, such as, speeches, memes, cartoons, visual arts etc, to vilify and denigrate any community,” the judgment said.
He also highlighted the duty of courts to step in when police or executive fail to honour Constitution and fundamental rights of citizens.
In this regard, he highlighted what was held in Imran Pratapgarhi case:
“If the police or executive fail to honour and protect the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, it is the duty of the Courts to step in and protect the fundamental rights. There is no other institution which can uphold the fundamental rights of the citizens.”
