Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind Challenges Assam CM's Remarks in SC
Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind moves SC against Assam CM's alleged communal remarks.
Photo by Marija Zaric
Key Facts
Petitioner: Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind
Respondent: Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma
Issue: Alleged communal remarks
Date: January 27
UPSC Exam Angles
GS Paper 2: Polity - Constitutional provisions, judicial pronouncements, role of ECI
GS Paper 4: Ethics - Ethical considerations in public life, hate speech
Potential question types: Statement-based, analytical
Visual Insights
Assam: Location of the Controversy
This map highlights Assam, where the Chief Minister's remarks sparked the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind's legal challenge. The case is now before the Supreme Court.
Loading interactive map...
More Information
Background
Latest Developments
Frequently Asked Questions
1. What are the key facts about the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind case against the Assam CM for UPSC Prelims?
For Prelims, remember these key facts: The petitioner is Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, the respondent is Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma, and the issue revolves around alleged communal remarks made on January 27. The case is currently before the Supreme Court.
2. What is the constitutional basis for the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind's challenge to the Assam CM's remarks?
The challenge likely invokes Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and expression, and Article 19(2), which allows for reasonable restrictions on this freedom in the interest of public order. The petitioner argues that the CM's remarks violate the spirit of the Constitution.
3. Why is the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind's challenge to the Assam CM's remarks in the news recently?
The case is in the news because it raises important questions about the limits of free speech for public figures, especially those holding constitutional positions. The Supreme Court's decision will likely set a precedent for future cases involving similar allegations of hate speech.
4. What are the potential implications of this case for common citizens?
This case highlights the importance of responsible speech by public figures. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, it could lead to stricter guidelines for those in power, potentially reducing instances of hate speech and promoting social harmony. Conversely, a ruling against the Jamiat could be seen as weakening the constraints on public officials' speech.
5. What is the role of the Election Commission of India (ECI) in preventing hate speech, as related to this case?
While the topic data doesn't directly link the ECI to this specific case, the 'Current Developments' section mentions the ECI's role in enforcing the Model Code of Conduct during elections to prevent hate speech. The effectiveness of these measures is currently debated.
6. What is the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind and why is its petition significant?
The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind is an organization that has approached the Supreme Court against Assam CM's statements. The significance lies in the fact that a prominent organization is seeking judicial intervention to address concerns about communal harmony and misuse of public office.
Practice Questions (MCQs)
1. Consider the following statements regarding Article 19 of the Constitution of India: 1. Article 19(1)(a) guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression. 2. Article 19(2) allows for reasonable restrictions on freedom of speech in the interest of public order. 3. The term 'reasonable restrictions' is explicitly defined in the Constitution itself. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- A.1 and 2 only
- B.2 and 3 only
- C.1 and 3 only
- D.1, 2 and 3
Show Answer
Answer: A
Statement 1 is CORRECT: Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution indeed guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression. Statement 2 is CORRECT: Article 19(2) allows the government to impose reasonable restrictions on this right in the interests of, among other things, public order, decency, or morality. Statement 3 is INCORRECT: The term 'reasonable restrictions' is NOT explicitly defined in the Constitution. The judiciary interprets what constitutes 'reasonable restrictions' on a case-by-case basis.
2. Which of the following sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony?
- A.Section 124A
- B.Section 153A
- C.Section 295A
- D.Section 307
Show Answer
Answer: B
Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony. Section 124A deals with sedition, Section 295A deals with deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings, and Section 307 deals with attempt to murder.
3. In the context of the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind's petition, what is the primary concern regarding statements made by persons holding constitutional positions?
- A.Violation of fundamental rights of specific communities
- B.Misuse of public office to spread hatred
- C.Impact on India's international relations
- D.Disruption of parliamentary proceedings
Show Answer
Answer: B
The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind's petition primarily seeks guidelines to prevent the misuse of public office by persons holding constitutional positions to spread hatred. The plea alleges that Assam CM made offensive remarks and seeks to prevent such misuse of power.