‘Objectionable’ Cartoons On PM, RSS: SC Grants Interim Protection To Cartoonist

Cartoonist Hemant Malviya

The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted interim protection to cartoonist Hemant Malviya, who is facing criminal charges for allegedly sharing objectionable content on social media, including cartoons targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh workers.

A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Aravind Kumar, while granting relief, made it clear that if Malviya posted any further offensive material, the state would be free to take action in accordance with the law.

The court expressed concern over the nature of the alleged online abuse, remarking, “Log kisi ko bhi, kuch bhi keh dete hain (People say anything to anyone).”

Petition Filed After Bail Denial By Madhya Pradesh High Court

Malviya had approached the Supreme Court after the Madhya Pradesh High Court refused to grant him anticipatory bail on July 3. The rejection came in connection with an FIR registered by Lasudiya police station in Indore, where he was booked in May based on a complaint filed by Vinay Joshi—a lawyer and RSS worker.

The petition challenged the High Court’s order and sought protection from arrest, arguing that the allegations were politically motivated and that his posts were an expression of satire and artistic freedom.

Allegations Of Hurting Religious Sentiments & Disrupting Harmony

According to the complaint, Malviya allegedly uploaded material that hurt the religious sentiments of Hindus and threatened communal harmony. The FIR specifically mentions several social media posts, which included cartoons, videos, and comments related to Prime Minister Modi, RSS members, and Hindu deities, particularly Lord Shiva.

Joshi, the complainant, claimed that the content was not only disrespectful but also capable of inciting unrest. He alleged that Malviya’s posts went beyond satire and amounted to deliberate provocation.

Court Issues Caution Against Repeat Offence

While the Supreme Court offered interim protection, it also issued a strong warning to Malviya. The bench emphasized that freedom of expression does not give a free pass to abuse or offend others, especially in ways that may disrupt public peace or religious harmony.

The case highlights the ongoing tension between artistic expression and social responsibility in digital spaces. With the increasing use of social media as a platform for commentary and criticism, the judiciary continues to grapple with where to draw the line.

The matter will be heard further as the investigation proceeds under the applicable legal provisions.