I watch what I say because I am afraid that somebody in the back of beyond will get offended and file charges against me – and I would have to travel to that place regularly, till it is resolved. I write on the Mohammed Zubair and Nupur Sharma cases, and the Weaponization of Offence, in the FPJ.

Mohammed Zubair cofounder and fact checker is in the crosshairs of a number of offended people. There are cases filed against him for offending Hindu sentiments. Those sentiments were allegedly injured by a series of tweets from Zubair on the ‘Dharmasansad’, where he referred to some people in saffron robes, as hate mongers. At the “Dharm Sansad these people threatened to ‘shoot 6 bullets into the chest’ of a former PM; threatened a war on the Indian state if the demand for a ‘Hindu Rashtra’ was not granted; called for the armed forces and police to join in ethnic cleansing. Zubai’s description of them as hatemongers, rather than the calls for violence, the overthrow of the Indian state, and genocide – upset some people. The ASG of Uttar Pradesh claimed that the men who made these statements were considered ‘holy’ by some and that their sentiments were offended. Zubair Is in judicial custody and being flown across the country, by the Delhi police, at taxpayer expense, as cases against him mount.

Then there is Nupur Sharma who is at the crosshairs of outraged Islamists, who would like nothing better than to murder her. Because they are offended. Because she said something about the Prophet, that many found objectionable. And she too is facing the wrath of the offended in multiple cases across the country. Not only is she facing charges for the same offense in multiple jurisdictions, but the Supreme Court also strongly admonished her for having caused offense and sermonized on her behavior. In the meanwhile, two men, who did nothing more than put up social media posts supporting her, have been executed brutally, and publicly, by offended Islamists. The cost of offending someone should neither be imprisonment, nor death. And, yet in modern India, it seems to be both.

While Nupur Sharma and Mohammad Zubair cases are cause célèbre for their respective sides as proof that the ‘other’ ecosystem holds sway, the fact remains they are the same case and arise out of our pandering to offended sentiments – religious or otherwise. To give you another example, In Maharashtra, actor Ketaki Chitale, and a 21-year-old student, spent time behind bars, as the police investigated the offence caused by their posts to supporters of the NCP and Sharad Pawar.

India does not have a section to deal with hate speech. Nor do we have one dealing with blasphemy. While the jury is open on whether there ought to be laws on hate speech; the general consensus is that India should stay away from blasphemy laws. In a nation with such diversity of religion – between religions, and even within a religion – and where a large part of the world believes in what it believes, without worrying about evidence – blasphemy laws will just be used to gag people and stop social reforms.

While we may not have laws against hate speech or blasphemy laws, what we have is something far more potent. A relic of the monolithic British Raj, which had no idea how to deal with so much diversity. Originally drafted by Macaulay and his team of colonialists, there was entire chapter of laws that related to religious offences. Foreigners who neither understood diversity of faith, or the innate Indic tradition of questioning it, drafted a law that we carry into the 21^st century

Today, Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code, is being weaponized to trample on rights and ensure that the process becomes the punishment. The section is applied to those “Deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage reli­gious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or reli­gious beliefs”. All you require is one person, somewhere in the country, offended by what you have said, and then file a FIR. And then process takes over. If there is a FIR, the police are bound to investigate. When the police investigate, your privacy is going to be invaded, no matter how mindful the cops are. It is he nature of work.

The problem is that this is not just about Zubair and Sharma. It is about the law being weaponized to settle scores. Be it someone playing loud music, making a movie, putting up a poster, creating an advertisement, wrapping food in a newspaper – all of it comes under the scanner of the politically motivated, who use section 295 a to rise up the ranks of those who outrage.

Maybe the solution on this is to investigate those who are outraged, rather than those causing the outrage. Find out why when millions of us are able to go about our days without being offended, or reacting to utterances, then why are some individuals getting triggered by statements? Maybe a police investigation to their intentions; and IT investigation into their funding; and a psychological investigation into what triggers them, will help us find a way out of this downward spiral that is eroding our freedoms.