Judicial Sensitivity to Sentiments is Regression

Key Points

• 1The article criticizes the judiciary for focusing on sentiments rather than protecting the right to free speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
• 2Examples include cases involving social media posts, statements by Kamal Haasan, and comments by a historian.
• 3The judiciary is increasingly equating speech that provokes emotional reactions with actionable harm.
• 4Courts are encouraging apologies and moral policing of language, creating a market for offense.
• 5The article argues that courts are eroding free speech and should focus on protecting the right to speak, not the comfort of the listener.