Cartoonist Agrees To Delete Objectionable Post On Prime Minister After Supreme Court's Rebuke

The Supreme Court on Monday (July 14) orally rebuked an Indore-based cartoonist who has been booked over objectionable comments and a cartoon on Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the RSS, saying that his conduct was inflammatory and immature.

A bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Aravind Kumar was hearing a special leave petition filed by cartoonist Hemant Malviya challenging a Madhya Pradesh High Court order which denied him anticipatory bail in a case related to a cartoon he had posted on Facebook.

The cartoon in question, made in 2021, posing questions about the efficacy of Covid vaccines, was reused by a Facebook user in May 2025 along with certain objectionable comments in the context of the Government's decision to hold a caste census. Malviya re-shared the post and endorsed the comments. This led to an FIR against him.

During the hearing today, after the Court expressed disapproval of the cartoonist's conduct, Advocate Vrinda Grover agreed to delete his post and to make a statement that he was not endorsing the objectionable comments.

Grover, admitting that the cartoonist's comments and the caricature might be "unpalatable" or in "poor taste", submitted that it was still not an offence. 

"The cartoon was from 2021 about some comments that some vaccines are safe as water. There had been no law and order problems because of this cartoon since then. It got revived by someone else because things live on social media forever...the words are not mine, only the visual is mine," Grover submitted.

Justice Dhulia asked if the petitioner was willing to delete his post, to which Grover agreed.

"The comedians, cartoonists etc. look at their conduct...," Justice Dhulia expressed. Grover submitted that the petitioner will delete the statement immediately. She prayed for interim protection, saying that the matter was about personal liberty and that the police were knocking at his door.

When the bench was told that the cartoonist was aged over 50 years, Justice Dhulia said, "Still no maturity. We agree that it is inflammatory."

Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, for the State, opposed the plea. If the cartoon is offensive, then there is an offence, the ASG said. "This is causing social disharmony and breakdown of law and order. All over the country, such things are happening and they are triggering," ASG said.

Ultimately, the bench posted the matter for tomorrow.

Background

The case was listed today after Vrinda Grover mentioned the matter last week before a bench of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Joymalya Bagchi.

She submitted that the High Court order condemns the petitioner and excludes the application of safeguards laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, Section 41-A CrPC, and Imran Pratapgarhi v. State of Gujarat.

Malviya's plea before the Supreme Court contends that a malicious FIR was filed against him to punish him for exercising his freedom of speech and expression. It claims that the FIR does not disclose any offence against him.

The cartoon, published on January 6, 2021, was described in the petition as a satirical comment on a public figure's statement that some vaccines were “safe like water” despite lack of rigorous clinical testing. The image, according to the petition, showed a common man being vaccinated by a public representative and had been in circulation on social media for over four years.

The plea says that an unknown person reposted the cartoon in May 2025 with added commentary, and Malviya shared it only to show that his work was publicly available. 

Following this, an FIR was registered on May 21, 2025, under Sections 196, 299, 302, 352, and 353(2) of the BNSS and Section 67A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The complaint, filed by a person claiming to be a member of the RSS and Hindu community, alleged that the cartoon insulted the RSS, incited violence, and hurt religious sentiments.

Malviya's anticipatory bail plea was first dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Indore, on May 24, 2025. He then approached the Madhya Pradesh High Court, which rejected the application on July 3, 2025.

In its order, the High Court held that Malviya had crossed the limits of free speech and observed that custodial interrogation was necessary. It took note of the cartoon, which depicted a figure representing the RSS in uniform, bent over with its shorts pulled down, being injected by a caricature of Prime Minister Modi, who was shown with a stethoscope and syringe.

The court also referred to “derogatory lines involving Lord Shiva” and found that the applicant had endorsed and circulated them. It said the act was “deliberate and malicious,” intended to provoke religious sentiments and disturb societal harmony.

The High Court held that Malviya could not claim protection under Section 41-A CrPC, Section 35 BNSS, or the Arnesh Kumar guidelines. It said that Sections 41(1)(b)(i) and (ii) would apply because Malviya had a propensity to repeat the offence.

In the petition before the Supreme Court, Malviya argues that the case relates to artistic expression and reposting of already public content, which does not require custodial interrogation. He contends that the FIR is being misused to penalise dissent and that the offences alleged do not attract a punishment of more than seven years.

Case no. – SLP(Crl) No. 9906/2025

Case Title – Hemant Malviya v. State of Madhya Pradesh