Allahabad HC Stays Arrest of Mohd Zubair citing "Not a Dreaded Criminal"

LITT Law for lawyers and teams

In a crucial order, the Allahabad High Court has granted relief to Mohd Zubair, co-founder of Alt-News, by staying his arrest until January 6, 2025, in a case concerning his posts on 'X' (formerly Twitter) about Yati Narsinghanand’s alleged inflammatory remarks. The decision underscores the tension between freedom of speech and allegations of promoting discord through social media.

Key Observations by the Court

• A division bench of Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Nalin Kumar Srivastava remarked that Zubair is "not a dreaded criminal" and granted him relief on the condition of:
  • Not leaving the country until the next hearing.
  • Cooperating with the police investigation.
• The Court’s six-page order noted that while an offence under Section 196 BNS was tentatively made out, it remains to be seen whether Section 152 BNS applies.

Case Background: The FIR and Allegations

The FIR against Zubair, lodged by Udita Tyagi, general secretary of the Yati Narsinghanand Saraswati Trust, stems from his October 3 post on 'X'.

• Content of the Post: Zubair shared a video showing Yati Narsinghanand, the priest of Dasna Devi Temple, allegedly making inflammatory remarks about Prophet Muhammad. Zubair tagged Uttar Pradesh police, questioning what action had been taken.
• Allegations: The complainant claimed that Zubair’s post incited violence by Muslims and contributed to protests against Yati Narsinghanand.
• Charges: Zubair is facing charges under Section 152 BNS for promoting separatist activity and under related provisions of the law.

State Government’s Submissions

• The Uttar Pradesh government argued that Zubair’s posts contained half-baked information, which allegedly:
  • Threatened India’s sovereignty and integrity.
  • Promoted a "feeling of separatist activity."
• Additional Advocate General Manish Goyal asserted that Zubair’s intent was to provoke violence and damage public harmony.

Arguments by Zubair’s Counsel

• Freedom of Speech: Zubair’s lawyers contended that he was exercising his constitutional right by highlighting Narsinghanand’s conduct.
• Common Practice: They argued that many news outlets and social media accounts had reported similar content, and Zubair’s post was not unique.
• Publicity Stunt: The counsel claimed that the complaint by Udita Tyagi was aimed at garnering publicity rather than addressing genuine grievances.
• No Prohibition at the Time: At the time of posting, there were no restrictions or prohibitions against sharing such content.

Court’s Interim Decision

• The Court stayed Zubair’s arrest until January 6, citing the need for further deliberation on whether his actions amounted to separatist activity.
• It granted three weeks to the state government and the complainant to file counterarguments.

Case Name: Mohammed Zubair vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and 3 Others