[BREAKING] Supreme Court grants interim bail to Mohammed Zubair in UP Police FIR

The Supreme Court on Friday granted interim bail to Alt News co-founder Mohammed Zubair in the case registered against him by the Uttar Pradesh police (UP Police) in Sitapur in a case of hurting religious sentiments [Mohammad Zubair vs State of Uttar Pradesh]..The vacation bench of Justices Indira Banerjee and JK Maheshwari granted interim bail for five days to Zubair and posted the case for further hearing before a regular bench. " ... the petitioner shall be granted interim bail in connection with FIR No. 0226 dated 01.06.2022 lodged at P.S. Khairabad, District Sitapur, Uttar Pradesh for a period of five days from today or until further orders of the Regular Bench on terms and conditions to be imposed by the Judicial Magistrate-I, Sitapur, which shall include the conditions that the petitioner shall not post any tweets and shall not tamper with any evidence, electronic or otherwise in Bengaluru or anywhere else," the Court directed.The Court was hearing a plea by Zubair seeking quashing of the first information report (FIR) registered against him by the UP Police.Zubair, who is facing another case by Delhi Police in a different matter, will have to come to Delhi and surrender before the Delhi Police. He is in judicial custody in that case too. .The case against Zubair was registered by the UP police for hurting religious sentiments based on a tweet he had put out against Mahant Bajrang Muni, Yati Narsinghanand and Swami Anand Swaroop referring to them as 'hate mongers'.Zubair was booked under Section 295A (deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs) of the Indian Penal Code(IPC) and Section 67 (publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act).He had approached the Allahabad High Court to quash the case but the same was turned down leading to the present appeal..In a parallel development, the Sitapur court had on Thursday rejected a bail application filed by Zubair in the same case and remanded him to judicial custody for 14 days.Judge Abhinav Srivastava rejected the bail plea on the ground that there was a possibility of the accused influencing witnesses, or repeating offences. It was noted that the matter was serious in nature and non-bailable..When the plea before the top court was taken up on Friday, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta raised a preliminary objection submitting that Zubair's bail was already rejected by a lower court but the same has not been disclosed before the apex court."FIR was on June 1, quashing plea was rejected on June 10 and yesterday Sitapur court granted 14 days custody. This was not revealed yesterday and affidavit was filed yesterday. This is clear purposeful suppression. Such a conduct should not be encouraged," Mehta said."This is their in our application. Please see paragraph 4. Paragraph 3 speaks of judicial custody," Senior Counsel Colin Gonslaves, representing Zubair, replied."Please show where you have mentioned bail was rejected ? He is seeking bail here without telling bail was rejected by a speaking order," SG maintained."I have challenged the Allahabad High Court order," replied Gonsalves."No criminal case can be made out against him. The foundation of this case is a tweet. I seek a quashing of proceedings. Questions of police or judicial custody are irrelevant now, There is no case made out and the proceedings need to be quashed. I had admitted this is my tweet. Is this a criminal offence," Gonsalves said."Against rejection of bail there is a different remedy," Justice Banerjee maintained.Gonsalves contended that the tweet has been admitted by the petitioner but the offence alleged is not made out from it."They say it was about insulting religion. Order says there is a prima facie case. I have admitted to this tweet. There is no investigation needed in this. Please see page 28 of our petition," Gonsalves contended.He said that Zubair was only highlighting the hate speeches made by certain persons who have been booked under law.While those who made the hate speeches have secured bail, Zubair has been arrested for highlighting the same."We only say till hate mongers like this are there now then who else do we need. All the others released on bail but I, a secular tweeter, was arrested. When I say hate monger I am not wrong police has prosecuted them under 295A IPC," Gonsalves said."You have to make an appropriate plea," the bench maintained."There was rejection of bail," the SG reiterated."What investigation are you doing to move me around, custody, seize my phone. I have admitted to my tweet already. Please see the part on the hate mongers. The people have been released on bail. Just see Milord what this country has come to. The person who exposes it is in jail and the person continuing is on bail. These hate mongers made remarks on constitution, judges and what not. This is what I did. I exposed this kind of venomous language against judges, constitution etc. I am in jail for this," submitted Gonsalves.Gonsalves also highlighted what Attorney General KK Venugopal had said about people making remarks against the Constitution and judges. "Please see what AG KK Venugopal said on this video on a request to initiate contempt plea. He said that those who believe in the institution will die a death by seeing all this. Zubair exposed it and he is now in jail. I admit it to what I said.".He said that the tweet for which he has been booked will not constitute an offence under Section 295A IPC and Section 67 of IT Act"Please see Section 295A IPC. How is it applicable to me? I was in fact defending this. Now please see Section 67 of IT Act. Even that is not applicable..it's against obscene material," he contended..Regarding the Allahabad High Court judgment, Gonsalves submitted that the High Court missed the point that the accused has admitted to the tweet."High Court order finding says that the matter was at premature stage and evidence had to be gathered and then court on basis of this can decide one way or other. But here I had admitted to the FIR . This is a point missed by High Court. The High Court says there is prima facie case for offences. How is this an offence under Section 67 of IT Act or 295A of IPC. Where is the offence ? If there is no offence then why he is in custody. That's what Bhajan Lal judgment is all about. Where is obscenity or religion," Gonsalves demanded..Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the State of Uttar Pradesh, said that Zubair is part of syndicate which puts out such tweets to destabilize the society."Let me point out facts which are suppressed by fact checker. He has been arrested by Delhi police and Delhi court refused bail as there is some money angle since money has been received from some foreign countries. This info was suppressed. High Court did not grant any interim relief. He is in jail thus," the SG said.He also pointed out that Section 67 has been dropped by the UP police."We argued before the UP Court and after this tweet there was a law and order situation. The person Yati Narsinghnanad was arrested and released. I am not defending him (Yati Narsinghnanad)," the SG said.He further pointed out that the fact that his bail was rejected has not been mentioned."UP court remanding him to custody has been suppressed," the SG said."Perhaps it is not bail rejection but only remand," Justice Banerjee remarked."There are two orders. Delhi court refused bail and here in UP too bail was rejected and remand was granted.All these suppressions and saying Section 67 is not made out. We have only charged Section 153A. Now he suppresses all of this and claims to be fact checker! There is something more than what meets the eye," the SG maintained.The SG also said that the speeches by Yati Narsinghnanad and he was not disputing that. "Speeches by Yati Narsinghnanad etc were hate speeches and they were arrested and they were in jail. I am not disputing consent by AG Venugopal. He was right in that," the SG said."For Section 153A, I have to promote the enmity between religions. If i tell the police about such speeches then it is not promoting enemity but promoting secularism. Sorry solicitor This section does not apply to me," Gonsalves interjected."His overall conduct is being criminally investigated. It is not just this one tweet. He is a habitual offender," the SG contended."SG please show us whether offence on 295A was made out or not," the bench asked."I am for the investigating officer. Please see Section 67 has been dropped. I will show how 295A has been made out. He has not written to police, he is tweeting it so that everyone sees it and then violence is incited," Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, appearing for the Investigating Officer, said.Mahant Bajrang is a respected religious leader in Sitapur and if someone calls him a hate monger, then it invites violence, the ASG submitted. "There is no scope of intention here under Section 482 Petition. We have to look at his devices and that is why we are going to Bangalore and remand was granted. Please see Section 295. Whether intention there or not it is a scope of investigation. You call a spiritual leader a hate monger and you outrage religious feelings," he said.The ASG further said that if Zubair's intention was to promote harmony, then he should have sent a letter to the UP Police instead of tweeting the offending video."There is an attempt to promote disharmony and Ill will among religious groups. If you are such a nice person then you should not have tweeted and sent a letter to UP police. That fact that he has tweeted has created the offence," the ASG submitted."If he is granted bail and remand rejected then he can destroy evidence in Bangalore. Such quashing petitions are not listed in vacations," the ASG further said."He says there is deprivation of liberty. In such a case you cannot say that there is no urgency," Justice Banerjee said.SG Mehta maintained that the conduct of Zubair was deplorable and he has not disclosed all facts."He has suppressed all facts and sudden urgency created by saying death threats etc," the SG said."We have not gone by death threats. We have gone by deprivation of liberty and that has happened," the bench responded.The SG said that the petition has not disclosed details about the Delhi Police case."Please see the application. Delhi court has given police custody remand, rejected bail, nothing has been mentioned. This affidavit was filed yesterday and he does not mention that he was taken on transit remand order from Delhi to UP. He has not mentioned any of these facts. These are deliberate and wilful suppression. You cannot play with system like this. It is too early a stage for interference when HC says there is a prima facie case," the SG contended."As SG says do you have the order on bail plea," the bench asked Gonsalves."We have not received the bail copy," replied Gonsalves. "Then say that bail rejected and order not received," the SG said..Gonsalves said that in this age, complaints are not always filed by sending letters."Nowadays everything is not about letters. The seers had commented on religious leaders saying Muslim women should be kidnapped and raped. Sitapur police replied even when it was 5 days had passed and said probe was on. Bajrang Muni Das had said that Muslim women should be raped if Hindu women are teased by Muslim men. NCW had taken cognisance as well," Gonsalves said."This is Bajrang Muni, what about others," the bench queried."Petitioner has deleted many tweets. This is the modus operandi," the SG said.The judges after discussing amongst themselves, agreed to grant him interim bail."Let the matter be posted before a regular bench. We will grant protection for few days on condition that you will not leave jurisdiction of this court and you will not put up more tweets. We will grant you interim bail for few days," the bench remarked.It then proceeded to pass the order granting bail for 5 days..Zubair is already in judicial custody in a case registered by the Delhi Police which has booked him for promoting enmity among religious groups registered. This case was based on a tweet put out by him in 2018.The tweet contained a screenshot from a movie from the 1980s - Kissi se na kehna.A Twitter handle called Hanuman Bhakt had flagged the same to Delhi Police alleging that Zubair had tweeted a questionable image with the intention to deliberately insult a Hindu God.He was remanded to UP Police custody yesterday in the UP police FIR..Advocates Sneha Mukherjee, Kawalpreet Kaur, and Satya Mitra also represented Zubair. Senior Advocate Garima Prashad and Adarsh Upadhyay appeared for the State. [Read order]