On March 1, Bhopal police commissioner Harinarayan Chari Mishra invoked Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, imposing a two-month restriction on social media activities to curb hate speech. The order not only bans inflammatory posts but also criminalises engagement – liking, commenting, and sharing – if such interactions are deemed capable of inciting communal tensions.
A key section of the order states, “An objectionable post does not incite as much enmity as the comments and cross-comments it receives.” The notification comes at a time when debates over digital censorship are intensifying, and vague phrasing with repeated emphasis on ‘possibilities’ and ‘potential threats’ raises serious concerns about selective enforcement and the erosion of free speech.
The crime branch on March 6 arrested one Sajid Mansoori from Raisen district in a hate speech case for a video recorded two years ago. The action, delayed by two years, fuelled concerns that the crackdown was being applied selectively, reinforcing fears of arbitrary censorship.
Unverified boycott claims spark political uproar
Shortly after the order, the media was flooded with unverified claims that Muslims in Bhopal had called for a boycott of Hindu shopkeepers during Ramzan.
BJP MLA Rameshwar Verma responded aggressively, warning users, “Don’t challenge Hindus. Stay in peace, perform Namaz, and eat Eid Sewai. You will be in trouble if you give a challenge. This country is governed by the constitution of Babasaheb Ambedkar… You will be in a difficult situation if Hindus boycott you.”
His statement followed several media reports amplifying the boycott claims without verification. A widely shared message attributed to Jama Masjid read: “Our holy month of Ramadan is about to begin. On this auspicious occasion, we should buy goods only from the believers. Do not engage in any transactions with the infidels under any circumstances.” Different media organisations aired such claims without verification.
The Wire found that one of the alleged posts originated from a user located in Kathmandu, Nepal – not Bhopal, according to his Twitter (now X) profile. The other post, rather than calling for a boycott, stated: “Buy from people who can celebrate Ramadan and Eid happily with your purchases.”
Muslim Personal Law Board member and Congress MLA Arif Masood dismissed the claims, stating, “No Muslim leader or organisation has called for a boycott. This is nothing but a rumor spread by those who thrive on hate.” He urged authorities to act against those propagating such messages.
Jam packed Lakherapura Market in Chowk. Photo: Huneza Khan
Legal cover for censorship?
In conversation with The Wire, Advocate Pratyush Mishra said that Section 163 of BNSS is equivalent to Section 144 of CrPC, as both allow the administration to impose restrictions to maintain public order. The order applies to objectionable content across social media. However, he questioned its legality since it is based solely on probabilities.
“Issuing such an order could infringe on fundamental rights, including freedom of speech, expression, and the right to peaceful assembly. If hate speech is the concern, how many FIRs have been registered? Why is there no consistent crackdown on hate speech in compliance with the Supreme Court’s directive to curb hate speech? If a crime occurs, action should be taken against the perpetrator, not the entire public,” he said.
India Hate Lab’s 2024 report shows a 74.4% rise in hate speech, with incidents jumping from 668 in 2023 to 1,165 in 2024. Muslims faced 98.5% (1,147) of these, and 97 cases shared with Christians. BJP-ruled states accounted for 79.9% (931) of incidents, while opposition-ruled states saw 234 (20%).
Mishra added that a mere reading of the order shows a lack of research behind its issuance. “This is essentially a gag order imposed under the pretext of maintaining social order. The order is an eyewash, as the administration has failed to define what qualifies as ‘abusive’ messages or images. This grants excessive power to the administration without any limitations. Such serious orders, which affect fundamental rights, should not be issued based on vague and unfounded possibilities,” he said.
The Supreme Court of India in April 2023 directed all states and union territories to register cases against those delivering hate speeches. A bench of Justices K.M. Joseph and B.V. Nagarathna warned that any failure to comply would be treated as contempt of court, and strict action would be taken against the responsible officers.
As per the India Hate Lab report, Uttar Pradesh (242), Maharashtra (210), and Madhya Pradesh (98) ranked highest in hate speech events, together contributing to 47% of the total cases in 2024, where top leaders delivered frequent hate speeches without facing any action.
Shops in jama Masjid complex. Photo: Huneza Khan
Communal rhetoric, media bias and political manipulation
Meanwhile, Madhya Pradesh Muslim Vikas Parishad (MPMVP) convenor Mahir Khan dismissed the boycott claims, questioning the origins of the viral message. “No Muslim organisation has issued such a call. The same group seems to be orchestrating both the rumor and the reaction. The same group seems to be orchestrating both the rumor and the reaction. See how the Police Commissioner issues a prohibitory order against hate speech, and almost instantly, a false claim spreads – followed by Rameshwar Verma’s reaction. The timing is too precise to be a coincidence and warrants investigation. Courts take suo motu action on trivial matters yet remain silent on hate speech. Why hasn’t action been taken against those openly defying its order?” he asks.
Posters urging people to buy only from Hindu shopkeepers had appeared across Bhopal and parts of Madhya Pradesh during Diwali (October 2024), with viral videos on social media. The posters, attributed to Bajrang Dal, read: “Apna Tyohaar, Apno Se Vyavhaar (Celebrate your festival with your own)”.
These posters were spotted at several key locations in the city, fueling political controversy. No police action was taken despite the communal messaging.
When intolerance became a profession
Veteran journalist Chandrakant Naidu dismissed the prohibitory order as an excuse for suppression. “Even during the Emergency, we didn’t see such arbitrary restrictions. At least Mrs. (Indira) Gandhi dared to declare an open emergency – these people won’t even do that. They spread rumors, yet no one traces their origin. If the law is fair, why is jagran allowed but azan questioned? Arrests should be based on evidence, not manufactured claims. Look at Ujjain – when a child was accused of spitting, they sent a bulldozer in retaliation. Officials called the media to witness it, yet later, they couldn’t even prove the allegation.”
In July 2023, Ujjain police arrested three Muslim teens for allegedly spitting on a Hindu procession and demolished their home to drum beats. Five months later, on 15 December, complainant Sawan Lot and witness Ajay Khatri told the high court they had never seen or identified the accused. Adnan Mansoori, the only adult, was granted bail after 151 days in jail, while the two minors had been released earlier.
Recalling Bhopal’s past, Naidu noted, “When I arrived in 1952, the city had fewer than 60,000 people – 70% Muslims and 30% Hindus. Even then, the Nawab managed 10-12 temples. Those who don’t need votes don’t play divisive politics. Today, democracy is being distorted to weaken the Constitution itself.”
He reflected on media and political trends, saying, “India’s strength lies in the fact that divisive forces are still a minority – about 35%. The rest remain rational. During Vajpayee’s time, this element was just 1%. He was the secular mask they hid behind. Now, with their numbers growing, they believe they can do anything. But even after three elections, their influence hasn’t truly expanded. Our democracy, though strained, still holds.”
Hindu woman praying at Dargah in Shakir Ali Hospital. Photo: Huneza Khan
“These tactics are mere distractions from administrative failures. They impose unconstitutional measures while pretending to react—even when there’s no real provocation. They proactively respond without even verifying if an incident has occurred. Intolerance has become a profession—people may be personally tolerant but profit from public displays of hate. Hate campaigns run on YouTube all day, yet by evening, the same people share tea,” he added.
India ranks 159th out of 180 countries in the 2024 Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders. Notably, the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) national vote share in the 18th Lok Sabha elections stood at 36.6%, down from 37.3% in 2019.
The Indian government proposed the Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2023, to regulate broadcasting and OTT platforms but withdrew it after public backlash. Calls for stricter digital censorship have resurfaced following the Ranveer Allahabadia controversy. The Parliamentary IT Committee, led by BJP MP Nishikant Dubey, has urged the I&B Ministry to introduce new regulations.
Mahir Khan challenged the narrative being pushed. “Muslims have historically been inclusive – proof of that is the number of non-Muslims who own shops in the Jama Masjid complex. These forces want to disturb communal harmony in Bhopal, which is the epitome of Ganga Jamuni Tehzeeb. If the commissioner bans hate speech, why ignore these unverified claims? We refuse to turn a non-issue into an issue. The community has been advised to stay cautious and not fall into these traps. But where do we seek justice when those meant to maintain order enable disorder?” he asked.
