The Karnataka Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill, 2025, set to be introduced in the upcoming legislative session, proposes imprisonment ranging from two to 10 years for offenders and introduces the concept of collective liability for organisations.Karnataka Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister HK Patil said that the legislation was necessary because “no existing law deals explicitly with hate speech”. This highlights a longstanding legislative gap in India — while the term “hate speech” is often used in popular discourse, it is not formally defined in India’s criminal laws.Current legal framework for hate speechIn the absence of a specific statute, Indian law enforcement agencies invoke a cluster of provisions from the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita to deal with cases involving hate speech. These sections are primarily meant to maintain “public order”, rather than to penalise hate speech as a distinct category.The most frequently invoked provision is Section 196, which is the successor to Section 153A of the Indian Penal Code. It penalises “promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.”However, data suggest that while arrests are common, convictions are rare. According to National Crime Records Bureau data cited in previous reports, the conviction rate for Section 153A in 2020 was merely 20.2%.Explained Law | How polygamy is regulated in India, from personal laws to state bansThe other BNS provision often used to deal with hate speech is Section 299, which penalises “deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.” It is similar to Section 295A of the IPC.Further, Section 353 of the BNS penalises statements or false information that may induce or incite someone to commit offences against the State or a community or disturb public order.Story continues below this adEach of these offences is cognisable – police can arrest without a warrant – and carries a punishment of up to three years.Section 66A of the Information Technology Act was often used for online hate speech, until the Supreme Court struck it down in 2015 for being unconstitutionally vague.Supreme Court’s interventionOver the last few years, the Supreme Court has taken a proactive, albeit shifting, stance on the issue.In October 2022, a bench of Justices K.M. Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy observed that a “climate of hate prevails in the country” and directed the police chiefs of Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand to take suo motu action against hate speech cases without waiting for formal complaints. The court warned that any hesitation would be viewed as contempt. This direction was later extended to all states and union territories in April 2023.Story continues below this adRead More | Where Sanchar Saathi stands on user consent, constitutional test on privacyHowever, the practical implementation has proved challenging. In August 2023, a Supreme Court bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti admitted while hearing a case that defining hate speech is complex, but the real problem in tackling it lies in the implementation and execution of law and judicial pronouncements.On November 25 this year, another bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta ruled that the apex court was “not inclined to monitor every incident of hate speech.” The bench noted that police stations and High Courts were competent to deal with such cases, referring back to the guidelines laid down in the top court’s 2018 Tehseen Poonawalla judgment, which mandated the appointment of nodal officers to prevent mob violence and lynching.Attempts to define ‘hate speech’In its 267th Report in March 2017, the Law Commission of India recommended the insertion of new sections – 153C and 505A – into the IPC to specifically criminalise incitement to hatred and provocation of violence.In 2022, a Private Member’s Bill called “The Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill” was introduced in the Rajya Sabha by Bharat Rashtra Samithi MP KR Suresh Reddy. The Bill sought to define hate speech as any expression that “incites, justifies, promotes or spreads discrimination, hatred, hostility, or violence against a person or group.”Story continues below this adIt also proposed to define “hate crime” as an offence motivated by prejudice against a victim’s real or attributed status, including religion, caste, gender identity or sexual orientation.It proposed omitting Sections 153A and 295A of the IPC in favour of these more specific provisions, but it was not passed.What the Karnataka Bill proposesKarnataka is the first state in India to introduce a Bill specifically for targeting hate speech. The proposed legislation appears to mirror some of the concepts found in the Law Commission’s recommendations and the 2022 Private Member’s Bill.According to the Karnataka Cabinet, the new Bill defines hate speech as an expression causing injury or disharmony against a person or group based on religion, race, caste, gender, sexual orientation, place of birth or disability. The inclusion of “sexual orientation” and “gender” marks the expansion of protected categories beyond those traditionally protected under the IPC and now the BNS.Story continues below this adA distinct feature of the Bill is “collective liability”. If hate speech is linked to an organisation, persons in positions of responsibility within that organisation can be deemed guilty. The Bill also empowers the state to block or remove hateful content on the internet.