HYDERABAD: Amid opposition from BJP and CPI MLAs and suggestions from Congress members, the Telangana Hate Speech and Hate Crimes (Prevention) Bill, 2026 was referred to an Assembly Select Committee on Monday.
Minister Ponnam Prabhakar, on behalf of Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy, moved a motion to take up and pass the bill. After discussion, panel Speaker Revuri Prakash Reddy announced that it was being sent to the Select Committee. BJP and CPI members opposed the bill, while some Congress MLAs suggested including provisions related to social media.
BJP MLA A Maheshwar Reddy termed the bill a “death warrant to democracy”. He said the lack of a clear definition of hate speech or hate crime could lead to misuse. “The government may treat criticism as hate speech. This undermines Article 19,” he said.
Outside the House, BRS working president KT Rama Rao described the bill as “a draconian tool to curb free speech”.
Existing laws sufficient, say CPI & MIM
Maheshwar Reddy also objected to the inclusion of “ill-will against a person, alive or dead” in the definition. “This could lead to cases even for criticism of the Nizam rule,” he said, adding that it could be used against political opponents.
BJP MLA Payal Shankar demanded withdrawal of the bill, stating that it would not benefit society and could curb freedom of speech.
AIMIM MLA Ahmed bin Abdullah Balala questioned the need for a new law when provisions already exist under BNS. He said the move could be aimed at bypassing Section 41(A) notice requirements. “The police must issue 41(A) notices in cases with jail terms below seven years. This law may bypass that,” he said, adding that religious propagation should not be covered.
CPI MLA Kunamneni Sambasiva Rao also sought withdrawal, stating: “This bill is an attack on democracy. Such laws existed only during the British era. Existing Acts are sufficient.”
Meanwhile, Congress MLAs supported the bill with amendments. Chikkudu Vamshi Krishna sought clarity on coverage of social media posts, stating that such laws were needed as hate speech was rising. Matta Ragamayee called for safeguards against misuse. Rajesh Reddy described it as “historic”.
Replying to the debate, Prabhakar said the Bill aims to safeguard social harmony and constitutional values, citing rising hate speech, especially online, and called it a “shield for the vulnerable”.