Calling someone ‘Miyan-Tiyan’ & ‘Pakistani’ not an offence: Supreme Court
In a recent verdict, the Supreme Court has clarified that calling someone “Miyan-Tiyan” and “Pakistani” may be considered in poor taste, but it does not constitute an offence. This decision was reached after a case was filed against an 80-year-old man who was accused of hurling abuses at an Urdu translator in Jharkhand.
The case was filed by the translator, who alleged that the 80-year-old man had used derogatory language and called him “Miyan-Tiyan”, which is a colloquial term used in some parts of India to refer to someone from Pakistan. The translator also claimed that the man had used the term “Pakistani” to describe him, which he found offensive.
However, the Supreme Court has now ruled that the remarks made by the 80-year-old man do not amount to hurting the religious sentiments of the translator. In its verdict, the court stated that while the terms used by the man may be considered in poor taste, they do not constitute a criminal offence.
This decision has sparked debate and controversy, with many people expressing their opinions on social media. Some have argued that the court’s verdict is a setback for efforts to promote tolerance and respect for all religions and communities. Others have argued that the court’s decision was correct, as the terms used by the man were not intended to cause harm or offend the translator’s religious beliefs.
The controversy surrounding this case highlights the complexities of religious and communal tensions in India. While the country has a diverse population with people from different religious backgrounds, there have been instances of communal violence and tension in the past. This case is a reminder that even seemingly minor incidents can have a significant impact on communities and individuals.
In this blog post, we will explore the implications of the Supreme Court’s verdict and examine the underlying issues that led to this controversy.
The Verdict: A Delicate Balance
The Supreme Court’s verdict is a delicate balance between freedom of speech and the need to protect religious sentiments. On one hand, the court has recognized the importance of freedom of speech and expression, which is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Indian Constitution. On the other hand, the court has also acknowledged the need to protect religious sentiments and prevent harm to individuals and communities.
In this case, the court has taken a nuanced approach by distinguishing between offensive language and language that is intended to cause harm. While the terms used by the 80-year-old man may be considered in poor taste, they do not constitute a criminal offence as they were not intended to cause harm or offend the translator’s religious beliefs.
This approach recognizes that language is often subjective and context-dependent, and that what may be considered offensive by one person may not be considered the same by another. The court’s verdict also acknowledges that freedom of speech is not absolute and must be balanced against the need to protect religious sentiments and prevent harm to individuals and communities.
The Underlying Issues: Communal Tensions and Language
The controversy surrounding this case highlights the underlying issues of communal tensions and language in India. The use of derogatory language and terms can often be a symptom of deeper communal tensions and prejudices. In this case, the terms used by the 80-year-old man may have been intended to cause harm and offend the translator’s religious beliefs, even if they were not intended to do so.
The use of language can often be a powerful tool for creating and exacerbating communal tensions. Words and phrases can be used to create a sense of fear, anxiety, and hostility towards individuals and communities, often based on their religious beliefs, ethnicity, or nationality.
The controversy surrounding this case is a reminder of the need for greater sensitivity and awareness when it comes to language and communication. As a society, we need to recognize the power of language and work towards creating a culture of respect and tolerance.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s verdict that calling someone “Miyan-Tiyan” and “Pakistani” is not an offence, but may be considered in poor taste, highlights the complexities of religious and communal tensions in India. The controversy surrounding this case is a reminder of the need for greater sensitivity and awareness when it comes to language and communication.
The court’s verdict also recognizes the importance of freedom of speech and expression, while also acknowledging the need to protect religious sentiments and prevent harm to individuals and communities. As a society, we need to work towards creating a culture of respect and tolerance, where individuals and communities feel valued and respected.
Source:
