New Delhi- A recent legal complaint against prominent social activist Didi Nirdesh Singh, known widely by her social media handle name 'didinirdeshsingh', has ignited a fervent debate across social media platforms, compelling a re-evaluation of rational and logical thinking in contemporary discourse.

The complaint, filed by the Volunteer Legal Group Legal Hindu Defence, accuses Singh of inciting hate speech and promoting religious enmity through her controversial posts.

The complainant has alleged that the individual used Twitter to incite hate speech and foster enmity among religious groups. They have requested immediate action under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Information Technology (IT) Act.

The complaint, filed under Section 75 of the BNSS, urges that an FIR be lodged without delay. It cites violations under the BNS, 2023, for provoking hate speech and promoting religious enmity through false statements and rumors that undermine public peace.

Despite the clear-cut provisions of this rule, the accused is said to be flagrantly violating the law. The complainant argues that the statements made by the accused are false on their face and were reiterated even after being challenged, with the apparent intent to disturb public peace and foster enmity among different groups.

The complaint highlights that such actions could lead to civil unrest and, therefore, requests the immediate registration of offenses under Sections 351(2) and 334(1) of the BNSS, as well as Sections 66E and 66D of the IT Act, and the filing of the FIR accordingly.

Didi Nirdesh Singh, the social activist renowned for her outspoken views, has faced scrutiny for several posts that challenge traditional Hindu beliefs and scriptures.

Her January post questioned the historical evidence for the existence of revered figures Ram and Krishna while asserting that there is concrete evidence supporting the existence of Buddha. This post set off a series of reactions from various groups, but it was her subsequent posts that further fueled the controversy.

In June 2023, Singh raised provocative questions about ancient Hindu scriptures, specifically targeting the creation myths involving Brahma. She questioned the physical plausibility of Brahma’s birth from the mouth of Lord Brahma, asking how such a process would accommodate menstruation or breastfeeding.

These questions were perceived by some as an affront to traditional beliefs.

Further intensifying the debate, Singh’s September 2023 post questioned the morality of several mythological figures. She asked why Brahma allegedly raped his daughter Saraswati, why Yam (the God of Death) is said to have raped his sister Yami, and why Manu is accused of raping his grandchild. Singh’s rhetorical queries were aimed at challenging the reverence held for these figures and questioned the pride some take in their ancestral figures.

Meanwhile, Didi Nirdesh Singh has articulated that her posts were never aimed at attacking individuals or communities but were instead a critique of systemic issues. She asserts, "We have never spoken against any person nor do we want to speak against anyone because our enmity is not with any person but with an idea, but with a system."

Singh’s statement emphasizes that her aim was to challenge and question entrenched systems and practices rather than to single out individuals. She points out that many of her friends, who are Brahmins, support her views and take pride in her efforts. This, she argues, demonstrates that the critique is not a personal affront but a call for broader systemic reform.

Didi Nirdesh Singh wrote: "Filing an FIR against me won’t stop the truth written in books. The more you try to suppress it, the more the repressed truth will come to light, and it is coming to light. You only like SC, ST, and OBCs as slaves. But that will no longer be the case.

All the useless, lazy, deceitful, violent, and divisive elements are united, while the true fighters for truth—Ambedkarites, socialists, and egalitarians—are all missing. This is our Bahujan unity, our ideological solidarity, and our strength."

The legal action against Singh has sparked a heated debate on social media, where supporters and critics have engaged in discussions about the boundaries of free speech and the role of rational inquiry in religious discourse.

In a notable development, IPS Anil Kishore Yadav has publicly extended his support to social activist Didi Nirdesh Singh amidst the ongoing controversy surrounding her posts. Yadav's endorsement brings attention to Singh's efforts in promoting educational awareness and critical thinking, framing them within the context of constitutional rights and free speech.

"Prosecuting someone for comments made in good faith while discharging duties specified under Article 51A(h) of the Constitution is not legally justified. It is a different matter that sometimes a particular ecosystem tries to suppress the truth," he tweeted.

He further said, " If any person (including SC/ST) files a false, malicious case against anyone, then action can be taken against him under Section 217/248 (IPC 182/211) etc. of the Indian Penal Code."

Supporters of Singh argue that her posts are a necessary critique of outdated beliefs and are consistent with a progressive and rational approach to religion. They assert that questioning traditional narratives is a legitimate form of intellectual inquiry.

Conversely, critics argue that Singh’s posts are inflammatory and disrespectful, claiming that they incite communal discord and undermine the social fabric of religious communities. They view the legal complaint as a necessary step to uphold public order and protect religious sentiments.