Supreme Court and UP Police 
News

Supreme Court orders voice test of UP DIG accused of communal slur; quashes case against Muslim man

The Court said the UP police had abused its authority in prosecuting the man, and directed a forensic test to verify if the senior officer had used a communal slur in an audio clip.

Ritwik Choudhury

The Supreme Court on Monday ordered forensic examination of a voice clip in which a Deputy Inspector General of Police from Uttar Pradesh, Sanjeev Tyagi, is heard using communal slur against Muslims [Islamuddin Ansari vs. State of UP].

A Bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and K Vinod Chandran also quashed all criminal proceedings against a senior Muslim citizen who had been prosecuted for forwarding the audio clip to Tyagi and asking him whether the voice heard was indeed his.

The Court stated that the prosecution should never have been initiated and also noted that the State of Uttar Pradesh has itself sought to withdraw the case.

The Court said that the FIR and charge-sheet amount to “abuse of police authority and the judicial process,” while setting aside the proceedings in entirety.

Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice K Vinod Chandran

The controversy began when the petitioner, one Islamuddin Ansari confronted Tyagi, who was then a Superintendent of Police, over the alleged circulation of an audio clip. In it, Tyagi was allegedly heard using derogatory language against Muslims.

Before lodging a formal complaint, Ansari had asked the officer to confirm whether the voice in the clip was indeed his but the SP never responded. Instead, Ansari was booked for circulating material containing hate speech.

He moved appeals before the trial court and the High Court but failed. He then approached the Supreme Court.

After the Supreme Court issued notice on Ansari's plea, the State on the next date of hearing said that it was withdrawing its complaint against Ansari.

This prompted the Supreme Court to note that the complaint against Ansari was nothing but a counter blast for confronting SP Tyagi and asking whether the voice in the audio was his.

"Having regard to the aforesaid, we find it to be totally an abuse of their authority and also the process of the Court by the Police in initiating the proceeding...we are more concerned with the background in which such a situation arose. The petitioner having asked the Superintendent of Police and rightly so, before making a formal complaint, as to whether, the voice purported to be his, disclosing that he had used some very objectionable language was, never replied to," the Court said.

Finding the conduct of the local police “wholly unacceptable,” the Bench directed that the entire case against Ansari be quashed. It further ordered an inquiry into the authenticity of the audio clip by sending it for forensic examination.

To ensure impartiality, the Court directed that the voice sample of the officer, now promoted as Deputy Inspector General of Police of Basti Range, be collected and examined by the Telangana State Forensic Science Laboratory in Hyderabad under direct supervision of its Director.

“The Director shall be personally responsible for ensuring that the test is done by competent persons of proven integrity and that the exercise is uninfluenced by any person, authority or extraneous consideration,” the Court said.

The Court has directed DIG Tyagi to appear before the Hyderabad laboratory within three weeks to give his voice sample. The petitioner will be required to provide the original audio clip or link for comparison.

The Bench also issued a clear warning to the authorities against any form of retaliation or intimidation against the petitioner during the course of the inquiry.

“If any attempt is made or action taken by any of the authorities to harass or exert any sort of pressure on the petitioner, the petitioner is at liberty to directly move an appropriate application in the present case itself,” it said.

The Director of the Telangana Forensic Science Laboratory has been made a respondent in the case and has been asked to submit his report to the Court in a sealed cover by January 31, 2026.

The matter will be heard next on January 12, 2026.

The petitioner was represented by advocates Aadil Singh Boparai, Abhishek Dubey, Prakruthi Jain, Shurti Agarwal, Amarjeet Singh and Satvinder Singh.

The State was represented by advocates Abhishek Saket, Sudeep Kumar, Manisha, Rupali and Nidhi Singh.

[Read Order]

Islamuddin Ansari vs. State of UP.pdf
Preview

ED initiated 6,444 cases since 2014; secured convictions in 53 out of 56 on merits: Government to Parliament

Registrations open for CNLU DPIIT IPR National IP Moot Court 2026

"Can't go with bulldozer and wipe off": Delhi HC asks Centre to hear stakeholders before demolition in Ajmer Sharif Dargah

Khaitan & Co and Society of Construction Law India unveil a whitepaper to strengthen Construction Dispute Resolution

ELP advises Prime Focus on ₹5,552 crore strategic acquisition and hybrid preferential issue

SCROLL FOR NEXT