The Law Commission Report no. 267 of March 2017 on Hate Speech states that “Hate Speech” has not been defined in any law in India. However, legal provisions in certain legislations prohibit select forms of speech as an exception to freedom of speech. The term “Hate Speech” has been used invariably to mean expression which is abusive, insulting, intimidating, harassing or which incites violence, hatred or discrimination against groups identified by characteristics such as one’s race, religion, place of birth, residence, region, language, caste or community, sexual orientation or personal convictions.
By giving tickets to candidates who have been charged with cases related to “Hate Speech” especially promoting enmity between religious groups and for committing acts that are intended to outrage religious feelings, political parties have been in a way abetting circumstances that lead to events such as communal riots and violence between different groups of people. Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and National Election Watch (NEW) have analysed the self- sworn affidavits of all sitting MPs and MLAs. Analysis reveals that many of our current MPs and MLAs, who are designated lawmakers, have actually declared cases related to “Hate Speech” against themselves. This analysis is based on the affidavits submitted by the candidates and MPs/MLAs prior to the last election they contested.
For the complete reports in English and Hindi, please see: https://adrindia.org/content/analysis-sitting-mpsmlas-declared-cases-related-hate-speech
The following IPC and RPA sections deal with ‘Hate Speech’ as per the ‘Law Commission Report no. 267 on Hate Speech’:
Provisions under IPC
Provisions under the Representation of the People Act, 1951
[1] Law Commission Report no. 267 – Hate Speech, March 2017 : http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report267.pdf
Recommendations
1. ADR supports the following recommendations of the Law Commission Report:
a. The Model Code of Conduct given by the Election Commission of India for the guidance of political parties and candidates should be amended to the extent that effect is given to the sub section (3A) of section 123 of the RPA, 1951. The first part of the Code i.e. General Conduct should expressly provide a provision that prohibits any kind of speech that promotes, or attempts to promote, feelings of enmity or hatred between different classes of the citizens of India on grounds of religion, race, caste, community, or language, by a candidate or his agent or any other person with the consent of a candidate or his election agent for the furtherance of the prospects of the election of that candidate or for prejudicially affecting the election of any candidate.
b. Hate speech poses complex challenges to freedom of speech and expression. Hence, new provisions in IPC are required to be incorporated to address this issue. Amendments to the IPC, 1860 and the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by adding new provisions on ‘Prohibiting incitement to hatred’ provocation of violence in certain cases’ following section 505 IPC, and accordingly amending the First Schedule of CrPC.
2. ADR believes that strict action must be taken against the candidates giving hate speech prior to and during the elections, and against the elected legislators even after the elections if found guilty of indulging in ‘Hate Speech’.
3. The Internet is an important tool for disseminating information and opinions; however, it also serves as a platform for disseminating unlawful speech. Political parties have been misusing the medium for unlawful statements. Hence, it is recommended that such unlawful statements on online platforms should be monitored and if the person is found guilty, they should be penalised.
4. Political Parties must not give tickets to the candidates who have declared serious criminal cases against themselves.
5. Cases against MPs and MLAs should be fast-tracked and decided upon in a time-bound manner.
|
MPs & MLAs |
Total number of Sitting MPs/MLAs analyzed |
Number of sitting MPs/MLAs with declared cases related to Hate Speech |
|
MPs |
763 |
33 |
|
MLAs |
4005 |
74 |
|
Total |
4768 |
107 |
Table: Sitting MPs/MLAs with self-declared Cases Related to Hate Speech

|
State |
Number of MPs/MLAs with Declared Cases related to Hate Speech |
|
Uttar Pradesh |
16 |
|
Bihar |
12 |
|
Tamil Nadu |
9 |
|
Telangana |
9 |
|
Maharashtra |
8 |
|
Assam |
7 |
|
Andhra Pradesh |
6 |
|
Gujarat |
6 |
|
West Bengal |
6 |
|
Karnataka |
5 |
|
Delhi |
4 |
|
Jharkhand |
4 |
|
Punjab |
3 |
|
Uttarakhand |
3 |
|
Madhya Pradesh |
2 |
|
Odisha |
2 |
|
Rajasthan |
2 |
|
Tripura |
2 |
|
Kerala |
1 |
|
Total |
107 |

Figure: Party wise MPs/MLAs with declared cases related to hate speech
|
Party |
Number of MPs/MLAs with Declared Cases related to Hate Speech |
|
BJP |
42 |
|
INC |
15 |
|
AAP |
7 |
|
DMK |
5 |
|
SP |
5 |
|
YSRCP |
5 |
|
RJD |
4 |
|
AITC |
3 |
|
AIUDF |
3 |
|
Independent |
3 |
|
SHS |
3 |
|
AIMIM |
2 |
|
CPI(M) |
1 |
|
MDMK |
1 |
|
NCP |
1 |
|
Pattali Makkal Katchi |
1 |
|
Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) |
1 |
|
Suheldev Bharatiya Samaj Party |
1 |
|
TDP |
1 |
|
Tipra Motha Party |
1 |
|
TRS |
1 |
|
Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi |
1 |
|
Total |
107 |
Table: Party-wise MPs/MLAs with declared cases related to hate speech
Association for Democratic Reforms/ National Election Watch
|
Media and Journalist Helpline
Email: a...@adrindia.org |
Maj. Gen. Anil Verma (Retd) Head Association for Democratic Reforms, National Election Watch 011 4165 4200, |
Prof Jagdeep Chhokar IIM Ahmedabad (Retd.) Founder Member, Association for Democratic Reforms, National Election Watch |
Prof Trilochan Sastry IIM Bangalore Founder Member, Association for Democratic Reforms, National Election Watch |