Court Halts Charges Against Ashoka Professor

The Supreme Court on Monday restrained the trial court from taking cognisance of the chargesheet filed by Haryana SIT in the FIR against Ashoka University professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad, who was booked for social media posts on

Operation Sindoor.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi also restrained the trial court from framing any charges in the case.

The SIT, constituted by the top court to investigate the two FIRs registered against Mahmudabad over his contentious social media posts, informed the bench that in one of them it has filed a closure report while in one a chargesheet was filed on August 22 after it was found that some offences were made out.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Mahmudabad,

termed the filing of the chargesheet as "most unfortunate" and said they have booked him under section 152 of BNS (sedition), whose validity is under challenge.

The bench asked Sibal to go through the chargesheet and prepare a chart of the alleged offences, saying it would consider the submissions on the next date of hearing.

The top court noted that in one FIR against Mahmudabad, a closure report has been filed and directed for quashing all the proceedings related to the case.

On July 16, the top

court questioned Haryana SIT’s line of investigation in the case, saying ”it misdirected itself”.

On May 21, the top court granted him interim bail, but refused to stay the investigation against him.

It had directed a three-member SIT to look into the FIRs against him.

Haryana Police arrested Mahmudabad on May 18 after two FIRs were registered against him.

His contentious social media posts on Operation Sindoor, it is alleged, endangered the sovereignty and integrity of the country.

The two FIRs —

one based on a complaint by the chairperson of Haryana State Commission for Women, Renu Bhatia, and the other on a complaint by a village sarpanch — were lodged by Rai police in Sonipat district.

He was booked under BNS sections 152 (acts endangering sovereignty or unity and integrity of India), 353 (statements conducing to public mischief), 79 (deliberate actions aimed at insulting the modesty of a woman) and 196 (1) (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion).

Several

political parties and academicians condemned the arrest.

Also Read: SC asks Samay Raina and other influencers to apologise on social media for ridiculing disabled persons