On March 9, the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) president, Raj Thackeray, asked his party cadres to burn the new autorickshaws that will soon be plying on Mumbai’s roads.
The apparent reason for this provocative statement, delivered on the eve of the party’s 10th anniversary, is the perception that a majority of the new autorickshaw permits have been given to non-Marathi speaking persons and that somebody in the government will be getting kickbacks from the rickshaw manufacturing company.
This is not the first time that the MNS chief has incited his party workers to violence. During the agitation to stop collection of road toll in Maharashtra, MNS workers had resorted to violence and vandalised several toll booths. Though there are several cases pending against him in Maharashtra and other parts of the country, it has not deterred him from committing similar offences time and again.
What is surprising, however, is the fact that the State government has not booked Thackeray for inciting violence on the basis of his speech on March 9 nor has it shown any inclination to move the court to cancel his bail — which has been granted to him in previous cases — on the grounds that he continues to commit similar offences time and again.
Kanhaiya Kumar was booked for sedition despite his repeated assertion that he believed in the Constitution of India, the Owaisi brothers have also been time and again been booked under various provisions of the law for inciting violence and also for creating enmity between different communities, and a couple of years ago, cartoonist Asim Trivedi was booked for sedition on the basis of some cartoons that he had drawn, depicting corrupt politicians.
But even after directing his cadres to take up violence, Thackeray has not been booked for violating the law.
It is a mystery why successive governments (the present one or previous ones) treat the MNS leader with kid gloves when he repeatedly challenges law and order.
This time though, while asking his party workers to take up violence against the new rickshaws, he did not mention any particular community. However, the speech has to be viewed in totality and it is clear that the call for violence is against the non-Marathi-speaking community.
Thackeray’s exhortations to take up violence violates Section 153-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which broadly speaks about ‘Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.’
If he is not charged for these violations, he will continue to do so, probably till the BMC elections slated for 2017. This will also embolden other political leaders to resort to similar provocative statements.
There is a clear provocation to commit rioting and disturb the peace of society and the State can also initiate chapter proceedings for good behaviour and seek an undertaking that he would not give such provocative speeches again.
In his address, Thackeray came down heavily on the judiciary, as the Bombay High Court had stayed the condition of knowing Marathi to secure autorickshaw permits. The judiciary would also be justified in taking suo moto contempt action against him.
A few months ago, the government filed cases against newspaper vendors in Mumbai for selling copies of an Urdu newspaper wherein the cartoons of Charlie Hebdo were published. The vendors were arrested and released later, while several cases were filed against the woman editor of that Urdu newspaper in different parts of the State and she continues to seek relief from the courts. An FIR has been registered against the editor of Tehelka in Kolhapur district for bringing out an issue on the hanging of Yakub Memon. The vendors, who were unaware of the contents of the newspaper and were merely earning their livelihood, were charged but the leader of a political party is spared when he asks people to resort to violence! The issue here is also about how the law is misused and how hastily cases are filed against some sections, while no urgency is shown in using the law against a person who repeatedly violates the law.
It is high time the State government takes action against provocative speeches, irrespective of who makes such speeches, as a message needs to be sent out that hate speech and asking people to take the law into their own hands will not be tolerated. There are enough provisions in the law to take such action. It is the will that is needed.
The author is a practising lawyer in the Bombay HC
