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

The Allahabad High Court stays the arrest of Mohd Zubair, co-founder of Alt-News, in connection with his 'X' (formerly Twitter) posts, citing that he is "not a dreaded criminal" and highlighting the case's implications for freedom of speech.

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

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

SC Upholds Conviction Under Common Intention: Severity of Injuries Alone Cannot Reduce Punishment
Legal Wires
SC Upholds Conviction Under Common Intention: Severity of Injuries Alone Cannot Reduce Punishment
The Supreme Court ruled that punishment cannot be reduced for individuals acting with common intention merely because the injuries inflicted by them were less severe than those caused by co-accused.
Supreme Court to Decide: Should the Age for Annulment Under PCMA Be 18 or 21 While Addressing Gender Inequality?
Legal Wires
Supreme Court to Decide: Should the Age for Annulment Under PCMA Be 18 or 21 While Addressing Gender Inequality?
The Supreme Court examines whether the age of majority for males under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act is 18 or 21, determining the limitation period for filing marriage annulment petitions.
Bombay High Court: Limited Evidence Invalidates SC/ST Act Charges in Complex Case
Legal Wires
Bombay High Court: Limited Evidence Invalidates SC/ST Act Charges in Complex Case
The Bombay High Court quashed SC/ST Act charges for most accused, citing lack of evidence, while upholding IPC charges of simple hurt and criminal intimidation for four individuals involved in the case.
Or
Powered by Lit Law
New Chat
Sources
No Sources Available
Ask AI