Bengaluru, Aug 3, 2025: The Karnataka government’s draft bill to curb hate speech and hate crimes has triggered a fierce debate over its scope, clarity, and potential for misuse.
The proposed Karnataka Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention and Control) Bill seeks to criminalise hate speech with a maximum prison term of three years, a fine of ₹5,000, or both. It also covers hate crimes, abetment, and assistance in such acts, but retains a uniform punishment across offences—something critics say fails to distinguish between the severity of crimes.
The bill defines hate speech broadly, including any intentional communication that incites or promotes hatred based on religion, caste, gender, language, disability, or profession. Critics, however, argue the definition is vague and open to interpretation.
Lawyer-activist Manavi Atri questioned the lack of gradation in penalties. “Lynching and aiding hate speech cannot carry the same punishment,” she said.
The Campaign Against Hate Speech has urged the government to revise the draft after stakeholder consultations, flagging legal and structural flaws.
Congress leader B K Hariprasad defended the bill, citing the need for strong legal safeguards and accountability, even from courts. He also suggested expanding the bill to include professional prejudice, citing controversial remarks by BJP MP Tejasvi Surya.
BJP leader S Suresh Kumar agreed with the need to tackle professional bias but warned the bill could become a “political tool” to stifle dissent. He called for broad discussions before passing the legislation.
The bill exempts artistic expression, academic inquiry, and fair reporting done in public interest. It also clarifies that religious teachings are not hate speech unless they incite harm.
Political analyst Harish Ramaswamy cautioned that interpretation of the bill’s clauses could be politicised, potentially criminalising legitimate critique.
The bill, alongside the proposed Karnataka Misinformation Regulation Bill, reflects the Congress’s manifesto promise to combat hate. However, its current draft has ignited a larger conversation on the balance between regulation and freedom of expression.