Supreme Court stays trial against Ali Khan Mahmudabad for Facebook post on Operation Sindoor

The Supreme Court on Monday stayed the trial against Ashoka University faculty member Ali Khan Mahmudabad over comments he made in a Facebook post on Operation Sindoor [Mohammad Amir Ahmad @ Ali Khan Mahmudabad v. State of Haryana].

A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymala Bagchi said that no charges should be framed against Mahmudabad and that cognisance should not be taken of the chargesheet filed against him.

"No charges shall be framed in pursuance with the chargesheet filed with relation to FIR No. 147...No cognizance shall be taken of chargesheet filed in FIR No. 147," the Court ordered.

The Court passed the order after Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju informed the Bench that there were two FIRs against Mahmudabad.

"While we have filed a closure report in one case, in the other case, the chargesheet has been filed because the offences were made out," he said.

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Mahmudabad, said that the development was unfortunate and pointed out that the Special Investigation Team (SIT) earlier formed was to produce the investigation report before the Court.

"You (respondent) are just persecuting people in this country that's all," Sibal said.

Mahmudabad moved the Supreme Court challenging his arrest and seeking the quashing of two FIRs registered over Facebook posts on Operation Sindoor, India's military response to Pakistan amid cross-border tensions following the Pahalgam terror attack of April 22.

In his Facebook post, Mahmudabad had criticised Pakistan-sponsored terrorism, denounced war and said that all the plaudits received by Colonel Sofiya Qureshi of the Indian Army, who had led India's press briefing on Operation Sindoor, should also reflect on the ground. In this regard, he said that rightwing supporters in India should speak up against mob lynching as well.

Two FIRs were registered against him over such remarks.

The first case was lodged based on a complaint by one Yogesh Jatheri citing the offences under Sections 196 (promoting hatred), 197 (imputations and assertions prejudicial to national integration), 152 (endangering the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India), and 299 (culpable homicide) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

The second FIR followed a complaint by Haryana Women’s Commission Chairperson Renu Bhatia and included charges under Sections 353 (public mischief), 79 (insult to modesty), and 152 of the BNS.

Mahmudabad was then arrested by the Haryana Police and sent to judicial custody.

When the matter was first heard on May 19, the Supreme Court had refused to stay the FIRs registered by Haryana Police but released Mahmudabad from jail on interim bail.

Pertinently, the Court also constituted an SIT to probe the matter in place of the Haryana Police.

At the time, the Court also took strong exception to the language employed by Mahmudabad in his posts, saying it could have dual meanings.

In later hearings, the Court criticised the SIT for trying to expand the scope of its probe against Mahmudabad.

In the last hearing held in July, the Bench remarked that the SIT was unnecessarily expanding the scope of its investigation and warned that the probe agency should confine its investigation to the two FIRs already filed against Mahmudabad on the two Facebook posts.

The Court added that the SIT need not summon Mahmudabad again for questioning, after noting that he had already joined for investigation earlier and that certain electronic devices owned by him were also examined.

At the time, the Court also ordered the SIT to finish its probe in four weeks, adding that this investigation must be strictly limited to the language and content of the two Facebook posts uploaded by Mahmudabad.

The Court further clarified again that Mahmudabad is free to write articles and social media posts, except on matters that are pending before the Court.

[Live Coverage]