DELHI | 14TH JULY 2025 – The Madhya Pradesh High Court had denied anticipatory bail to Malviya, prompting him to move the top court.
The Supreme Court on Monday criticised Indore-based cartoonist Hemant Malviya for his “immature” cartoon that portrayed Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) in an “undignified” manner [Hemant Malviya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh].
A Bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Aravind Kumar was hearing an anticipatory bail plea filed by the cartoonist, who moved the top court for relief after his plea was dismissed recently by the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
The Supreme Court today termed the cartoonist’s conduct “inflammatory” and “immature.”
“Still no maturity in him. It is indeed inflammatory,” Justice Dhulia said.
Representing Malviya, advocate Vrinda Grover replied,
“The post (containing the cartoon) is deleted… He is over 50. The post did not amount to an offence. It is about personal liberty.”
“This is happening all across. If it’s offensive, then also,” Additional Solicitor General of India KM Nataraj weighed in.
The Court eventually said it will hear the matter further tomorrow.
Malviya was booked in May this year over the Facebook post that was deemed to be objectionable by a member of the RSS.
He stands accused of the offences under Sections 196 (promoting enmity between different groups), 299 (insulting religion or religious beliefs), 302 (act with intent to wound religious feelings), 352 (insult with intent to provoke breach of peace), and 353 (mischief) of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 67A of the Information Technology Act.
In the cartoon, a man wearing the RSS uniform is shown bending over with his shorts pulled down and exposing his bottom to the caricature of the Prime Minister. Modi was shown with a stethoscope around his neck, holding an injection in his hand and administering it to the person bending over.
In an order passed on July 3, Justice Subodh Abhyankar of the High Court observed that Malviya had misused the freedom of speech and ought to have used his discretion while drawing the caricature in question.
He has clearly overstepped the threshold of freedom of speech and expression and does not appear to know his limits, the High Court said while calling for his custodial interrogation.
“In the considered opinion of this court, on the face of it, the conduct of the applicant in depicting the RSS, which is a Hindu organisation, along with the Prime Minister of this country in the aforesaid caricature, coupled with his endorsement of a rather demeaning remark, dragging unnecessarily the name of lord Shiva in the comments tagged to it, is nothing but the sheer misuse of the freedom of speech and expression as enshrined under Art.19(1)(a) of the Constitution, and falls under the definition of offence as contended by the complainant,” the single-judge said.
The High Court added that the post “becomes more unsettling” when the “derogatory lines” involving Lord Shiva are also added to it.
It also noted that Malviya had encouraged other people to experiment with the caricature, “which certainly cannot be said to be made in good taste or faith.”
In the plea before the top court, Malviya has clarified that he had published the original cartoon during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic when social media was rife with misinformation and fear related to the safety and efficacy of the vaccines.
“His cartoon is a satirical caricature work which offers social commentary on the comments made by a public figure regarding some vaccines being effective and ‘safe like water’, while in the same breath admitting that their efficacy remains untested through rigorous clinical trials,” it stated.
The plea added that a social media user on May 1 this year had posted the cartoon with his comment, implying that the “caste census is merely a tool to distract the public from issues like Waqf and Pahalgam.”
Malviya said that after he came to know that his earlier cartoon was used like this, he only shared the same to show that the public is free to use his cartoons with their name and any personal opinions or socio-political comments they may have.
He submitted that his cartoons are meant for the public good and devoted to the public who are the ultimate custodians of his work and therefore, can use them as their own.
“Further, the petitioner has acknowledged the commentary and critique of someone else, without offering his own comments on the issue,” Malviya’s plea stated.
