The Supreme Court announced on Tuesday, November 15, 2022, that there has been a nearly 500% increase in reported hate speech cases against politicians and public officials since 2014.

The application was made on the petitioner's behalf in a case involving the scope of public functionaries' free speech rights, such as ministers. The case emerges from the Bulandshahar rape incident, which was dismissed by a State Minister, Azam Khan, as a "political conspiracy and nothing else."

He cited a number of derogatory statements made by such functionaries, including one reportedly made by a BJP and RSS leader about "wiping out" two religious communities. Such speeches, according to the petitioner, personify political leaders' exclusionary agendas and provide fertile ground for incitement to violence.

"Hate speech expressed at the highest levels of political authority remain unchecked, and new policies have exacerbated a climate of intercommunal tension and impunity for offenders. In many other occasions, even when there is no communal anger, the derogatory speeches can diminish the dignity, self-esteem and privacy of citizens or their collectives, especially the marginalised and vulnerable," 

The petitioner recommended that the National and State Human Rights Commissions be notified of the situation. He went on to say that the court might imply to the legislature that a code of conduct for cabinet ministers at the Center and the States be drafted. It is also suggested that India adopt the "Ombudsman model," which would regulate hate speech without the need for prior sanction. An Ombudsman serves as an intermediary and independent official who receives complaints about public officials and recommends solutions for resolving them.

The matter has been reserved for judgement by a five-judge constitution bench consisting of Justices Abdul Nazeer, B. R. Gavai, A. S. Bopanna, V. Ramasubramanian, and B. V. Nagarathna. The main question is whether free speech by public officials, such as ministers, MLAs, and MPs, should be subject to more restrictions than those imposed by Article 19. (2).

In 2016, the case was referred to a larger bench.

Case Title: Kaushal Kishor V. The State Of Uttar Pradesh Govt Of Up Home Secretary