The Allahabad High Court has observed that throwing non-vegetarian food waste into the Ganga could hurt the sentiments of the Hindu community [Mohd Azad Ali And 2 Others v State of UP]

Justice Rajiv Lochan Shukla made the observation on May 15 while granting bail to five of the 14 Muslim men booked for hosting an Iftar (fast-breaking evening meal eaten by Muslims during the Ramadan month) on a boat on river Ganga in March.

“The present case involves members of the Muslim community having a Roza Iftar party, and during the said Iftar party, while partaking of food, non-vegetarian food is said to have been consumed by the members of the Muslim community, who are then alleged to have thrown the remains into the River Ganges. This fact in the dispassionate opinion of the Court could rightly be said to hurt religious sentiments of the Hindu community,” the Court said.

However, the Court also said that their expression of remorse could be considered for grant of bail.

It noted that not only the accused, their families also had expressed regret for the "pain that had been caused to the society at large".

“This Court further understands that while facing prosecution in a criminal case, specific acceptance of the crime cannot be made by a person swearing an affidavit on behalf of the person, who has been incarcerated and while considering grant of bail an admission to the crime alleged is not warranted. However, the affidavits that have been filed in support of the bail application before the Court as well as the submissions of the Learned counsel for the applicants show genuine remorse for the actions attributed to the applicants.”

The Court also noted that none of the offences initially levelled against the accused provide for punishment of more than seven years. It expressed doubt over the allegation of the boatman that his boat was forcibly taken over by the accused.

“It would be sufficient to note here that before registration of the case, the said boatman had not come forward to lodge any report or make any complaint regarding the extortion meted out to him. In the prima facie opinion of the Court, the delay by boatman Anil Sahni in coming forward with the allegations of extortion creates a suspicion on his story,” it added.

Considering that the accused have been in custody since March 17 and have expressed regret for their actions, the Court granted bail to five of the 14 accused.

Meanwhile, three more accused were granted bail by Justice Jitendra Kumar Sinha the same day by way of a separate order.

"The applicants have been languishing in jail since 17.03.2026 and they have undertaken to file affidavit before the learned Court concerned and the concerned police station that they will not indulge in / repeat similar activities in future," Justice Sinha noted in the order.

A first information report (FIR) stands registered based on a complaint filed by Rajat Jaiswal, Varanasi city unit president of the Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha (BJYM), accusing the men of hurting religious sentiments.

The FIR stated that the men consumed chicken biryani and discarded its remains in the river.

The men were initially booked under Sections 298 (defiling a place of worship), 299 (malicious act with intent to outrage religious feelings), 196(1)(B) (promoting enmity), 270 (public nuisance), 279 (fouling water of a public spring or water reservoir), and 223(B) (disobedience of an order duly promulgated by a public servant) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), along with section 24 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.

The police later added more serious charges, including under Section 308(5) BNS (extortion under threat of death or grievous hurt). This charge was added after the owners of the boat alleged that the accused men took the boat from them forcibly. 

They were also charged under Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, which penalises publishing or transmitting material in electronic form that is lascivious, appeals to prurient interests or depraves/corrupts viewers.

Advocate Raghuvansh Misra represented the accused.

Additional Advocate General Anoop Trivedi, with Advocates Shashank Tripathi and Nitesh Srivastava, appeared for the State.

[Read Order]