The Supreme Court has granted anticipatory bail to cartoonist Hemant Malviya, who was accused of circulating objectionable cartoons of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) workers on social media. The relief, however, comes with conditions that Malviya must cooperate fully with the ongoing police investigation, with authorities retaining the right to seek cancellation of his bail in case of non-cooperation.
A bench comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria took note of Malviya’s public apology, which he had posted on both Facebook and Instagram. His counsel, Vrinda Grover, reiterated that he had expressed regret, while the Additional Solicitor General K M Nataraj maintained that summoning would follow once the evidence collection process was complete.
The case originated in Indore, where Malviya was booked in May after lawyer and RSS worker Vinay Joshi lodged a complaint alleging that the cartoonist’s posts had offended Hindu religious sentiments and disturbed communal harmony. The FIR accused him of uploading cartoons, photographs, videos, and comments targeting Modi, RSS workers, and even religious figures like Lord Shiva.
Earlier, on July 15, a separate bench of Justices Kumar and Sudhanshu Dhulia had shielded Malviya from coercive action, a protection that has now been made permanent. At that time, the court also expressed concern over the increasing spread of objectionable content on social media and highlighted the need for judicial measures to address the problem.
Malviya, in an affidavit before the apex court, had offered a wholehearted apology, with the judges stressing their expectation that his regret was genuine and heartfelt. However, the state argued that the posts were crucial evidence and should not be deleted during the investigation.
The Madhya Pradesh police have invoked multiple charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, including Section 196 (acts prejudicial to communal harmony), Section 299 (malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings), and Section 352 (intentional insult provoking breach of peace), along with Section 67-A of the IT Act relating to the circulation of sexually explicit material online.
Malviya had earlier failed to secure relief from the Madhya Pradesh High Court, which rejected his anticipatory bail plea on July 3, prompting him to approach the Supreme Court. His counsel also argued that he should not be held accountable for comments made by third parties on his social media posts.
The case, while granting him temporary relief, underscores the judiciary’s dual concerns: safeguarding individual rights while addressing the rampant misuse of social media to spread objectionable and divisive content.
