Prof's arrest tests some cardinal principles of law
With the Supreme Court granting him interim bail, Ashoka University associate professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad got some relief in the case filed against him over his recent social media posts on Operation Sindoor. While taking a pacifist line, Mahmudabad spoke about the symbolism of fielding two women officers—Col Sofiya Qureshi and Wing Commander Vyomika Singh—for the operation’s press briefings. He remarked that making Col Qureshi the army’s face went against Pakistan’s founding principle—the two-nation theory. While applauding her, armchair commentators ought to equally vociferously demand protection for the victims of mob lynchings and arbitrary bulldozing of properties, he argued. There is merit to the point. But there is also a time and place for such expressions. While hearing Mahmudabad’s case, Justice Surya Kant asked, “The monsters came all the way and attacked our innocents. We were staying united. Why try to gain cheap popularity on this occasion?” In other words, the right to free speech ought to be exercised judiciously.
As for the right to liberty, Mahmudabad was arrested on May 18 on the basis of two FIRs, one following a complaint by Renu Bhatia, head of the Haryana State Commission for Women. The charges include endangering the sovereignty, unity and integrity of the nation, and insulting a woman’s modesty. However, on questioning, Bhatia has not been able to highlight the part of Mahmudabad’s post that insulted a woman’s modesty. Nor could Additional Solicitor General S V Raju explain it when asked by Justice Kant. Meanwhile, Ashoka University erred in not supporting Mahmudabad’s credentials, although its faculty and students rallied in his support. A cardinal principle of criminal law, often reiterated by the Supreme Court, is that bail should be the rule, and jail the exception. Yet, a Sonepat court remanded Mahmudabad to custody.
This brings us to the obnoxious “sister of terrorists” remark made by Madhya Pradesh minister Vijay Shah against Col Qureshi around the same time. He is still free despite the state high court taking suo motu cognisance and ordering an FIR, and the Supreme Court refusing to accept his apology as an end to the matter. This calls into question another cardinal principle: equality before the law. Now, the court-appointed special investigative teams must be allowed to parse both sets of comments. The cases’ disposal will, hopefully, ease the tension sparked by these avoidable provocations.