Belagavi (Karnataka) [India], December 18 : The Karnataka Legislative Assembly on Thursday passed the Hate Speech and Hate Crimes Prevention Bill, 2025, to curb acts that promote enmity, hatred, and disharmony among individuals and communities.
The Bill was taken up for discussion in the Assembly in Belagavi, where Karnataka Home Minister G Parameshwara detailed its provisions and explained the need to clearly define hate speech and hate crimes within a legal framework.
Defining hate speech, Parameshwara said it refers to "the communication of hate speech by making, publishing, or circulating, or any act of promoting, propagating, inciting, abetting, or attempting such hate speech to cause disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred, or ill-will against any person (dead or alive) or a group of persons or an organisation."
Explaining the intent of the legislation, the Home Minister said that hate crimes needed a precise definition to effectively address statements and actions that target specific communities. "It's about someone speaking out against a particular community," he said.
Citing examples of statements that incite violence or pit one community against another, he said, "I have some newspaper clippings here regarding hate speeches. Look at what has been said in them -- 'We should go and kill someone tomorrow morning,' or words that pit one community against another, saying they should all be 'beaten down'."
Parameshwara also outlined the penalties under the new law. "Whoever commits hate crimes shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year, but which may be extended to seven years, and with a fine of Rs 50,000," he said.
He added that for subsequent or repeated offences (two or three times), the punishment would be increased. "For repetitive offences, the punishment will be increased to two years and a fine of Rs 1 lakh (instead of 50,000)," he said.
During the discussion, the Home Minister proposed an amendment to the Bill, clarifying that the maximum punishment would be seven years instead of the initially proposed ten years. "Seven years is sufficient. We have to consider this within the legal framework. Therefore, the clause extending punishment to ten years needs to be changed," he said, seeking the House's approval for the amendment.