Telangana Assembly Refers Hate Speech Bill To Select Committee Following Demands From Parties
State Transport Minister Ponnam Prabhakar, who moved the bill on behalf of the Chief Minister and later replied to the debate, denied the allegations of the BJP and other members that the provisions of the bill hurt freedom of speech
While several ruling party members supported the immediate enactment of the Bill, which was introduced on Sunday, the proposed legislation faced strong opposition from the BJP and the CPI, with AIMIM joining it with conditional support. All of them calling for further study of the Bill’s provisions, and the need to refer it to a select committee.
The BRS, whose legislators were suspended from the House on Sunday, also opposed the Bill, issued a statement calling the proposed legislation draconian, and asked the government to reconsider its move to enact the legislation.
Following the discussion in the House, transport minister Ponnam Prabhakar who was piloting the Bill on behalf of Chief Minister A. Revanth Reddy, said the government was willing to refer it to the select committee following which legislative affairs minister D Sridhar Babu moved the motion to do so, which was approved by Speaker Gaddam Prasad.
Prabhakar said the intent of the government was not to curb free speech or undermine Article 19/1A of the Constitution that governs free speech. “We are not doing anything new, there are already reasonable restrictions built into Article 19. This is not to rob human rights, this is not a vendetta law and the Bill follows the spirit of the Constitution,” he said.
BJP floor leader Aleti Maheshwar Reddy, declaring his party’s opposition to the Bill, said it would move the state into becoming a police state as mere suspicion of hate speech by anyone would the police powers to file a case even without a complaint being received. Even worse, he said, “The Bill places the burden of proof of innocence on the accused. The Bill is a death warrant for free speech. There is absolutely no clarity on what constitutes hate speech, and gives powers to the government to punish an entire group just because one person in the group is suspected of hate speech.”
“The aim of this Bill is to create fear in society,” he said. Three BJP MLAs, Palvai Harish Babu, Payal Shankar and Rakesh Reddy, to opposed the Bill and demanded that it be referred to a select committee.
CPI member Kunamaneni Sambasiva Rao declared that the party was opposed to it, and wanted its withdrawal. “Democracy is already under siege. This is an attack on freedom of speech,” adding that through this Bill, the “state was joining the Centre in curbing free speech,” Sambasiva Rao said. Existing laws are enough to tackle instances of any hate speech, he said.
AIMIM member Ahmed bin Abdullah Balala raised the question whether a person propagating a religion can be charged with hate speech as there was a possibility that such actions could be perceived as hatred towards another religion. “While the intent is good, the Bill creates serious problems of interpretation and must be referred to a select committee,” he said.
What the hate speech Bill proposes
Anything that is spoken, or written whether in print, or in electronic forms, can be perceived as designed to cause injury, hatred, or enmity based on race, religion, sex, gender, caste, sexual orientation, disability or place of birth.
All hate crimes are non-bailable, and are cognisable offences.
Burden of proof of innocence on the accused, cases can be filed by police without having to receive a complaint.
Even if one person on a social media group makes a perceived hate speech comment, the entire group can be punished.
No action can be sought or taken against government officials pursing cases under the Bill’s provisions
All cases will be non-bailable, punishment of ₹50,000 and one year imprisonment that can be extended up to seven years, subsequent offences can attract fine of ₹1 lakh, and 10 years imprisonment.
Magistrates may, even on suspicion that a person who committed a previous offence under this law, may commit another offence under the law, can initiate action against such persons.
Hate Speech Bill is draconian, says KTR
The BRS on Monday condemned the government for the proposed Telangana Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Act, 2026, calling it a “draconian tool to curb free speech.” Party working president K.T. Rama Rao said that while preventing genuine hate speech and maintaining social harmony was an important responsibility of any government, the present framework appears dangerously broad, vague, and open to misuse.
The Bill risked “becoming an instrument for selective targeting of opposition leaders, critics, journalists, and ordinary citizens expressing dissent. It’s definition of hate speech using sweeping expressions such as ‘promoting ill-will, distorting harmony’ and ‘spreading false information’ are subjective and lack clear legal boundaries. Without precise definitions, enforcement becomes dependent on interpretation rather than evidence,” he said.
The Bill, he said, contradicted Supreme Court judgments which in its landmark judgment in ‘Shreya Singhal vs Union of India’ clearly held that only speech directly inciting violence or public disorder can be restricted. “Mere criticism, advocacy, satire, or disagreement cannot be punished. Any legislation that goes beyond this constitutional threshold risks being struck down by courts for violating Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution,” he said.
Rama Rao said that the most worrying aspect is leaving it to the executive to decide what constitutes ‘fake news.’ These harsh punishments are likely to discourage journalists from reporting sensitive issues, students from expressing opinions, citizens from criticising policies, and opposition parties from questioning the government, he said.