The Supreme Court on Monday strongly criticized Indore-based cartoonist Hemant Malviya for an objectionable caricature depicting Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), calling his conduct “inflammatory” and lacking maturity.
A bench comprising Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Aravind Kumar, while hearing Malviya’s plea for anticipatory bail, observed sharply: “Cartoonists, comedians, etc., must reflect on their conduct.”
The bench noted that Malviya, aged over 50, had failed to show the discretion expected of someone his age. “Still no maturity,” Justice Dhulia remarked, describing the caricature as “inflammatory.”
Appearing for Malviya, Advocate Vrinda Grover told the bench that her client was willing to take down the post and clarify that he did not endorse the objectionable commentary attached to it. She acknowledged that while the caricature may be “unpalatable or in poor taste,” it did not amount to a criminal offence.
Grover also sought interim protection from arrest, stating that the police had already reached Malviya’s doorstep. With no interim relief granted, the bench scheduled the matter for further hearing on Tuesday.
Malviya had earlier been denied anticipatory bail by the Madhya Pradesh High Court on July 3. The High Court ruled that he had misused the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution and said that his caricature warranted custodial interrogation.
In its July 3 order, Justice Subodh Abhyankar of the Madhya Pradesh High Court observed that the cartoon “clearly overstepped the threshold of freedom of speech” and constituted a “sheer misuse” of Article 19(1)(a). The court said custodial interrogation was necessary.
“In the considered opinion of this Court, 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 that unnecessarily drags the name of Lord Shiva in the tagged comments, is nothing but a sheer misuse of the freedom of speech and expression,” the High Court observed.
Before the Supreme Court, Malviya stated that the original cartoon was published during the COVID-19 pandemic as a satirical response to contradictory statements on vaccine safety. The image depicted a person in RSS attire, bent over, being administered an injection by a caricature of the Prime Minister.
Malviya’s petition stated that the cartoon was intended to highlight the confusion and fear surrounding vaccine messaging during the pandemic. He clarified that he did not author or endorse the recent commentary linked to the cartoon.
On May 1, 2025, a social media user reposted the cartoon with added commentary linking it to caste census and Waqf-related issues. Malviya later reshared that post to demonstrate that his artwork was open to public use and interpretation.
The petition emphasised that Malviya neither endorsed nor commented on the added content, and merely acknowledged the user’s adaptation of his cartoon. The top court will continue hearing the matter on Tuesday.
Advertisement
