Top News

The Allahabad High Court on Monday said the slogan “Gustakh-e-Nabi Ki Ek Hi Saza, Sar Tan Se Juda”, which calls for beheading as punishment for insulting the Prophet, amounts to a challenge to the authority of law as well as India’s sovereignty and integrity. The court said the slogan could not be placed in the same category as religious chants such as “Jai Shri Ram”, “Har Har Mahadev” or “Nara-e-Takbir, Allahu Akbar”, which it described as expressions of reverence towards a deity or religious figure.

 

Justice Ashutosh Srivastava made the observation while dismissing the bail plea of Maulana Tauquir Raza, a clerk at Ala Hazrat Dargah, in connection with the Bareilly violence.

 

Raza was arrested in connection with violence that erupted in Bareilly in September last year following a controversy over ‘I Love Mohammed’ posters. Uttar Pradesh Police have accused him of inciting the violence. He also heads the political outfit Ittehad-e-Millat Council.

The prosecution alleged that the slogan was raised at a gathering that later turned violent, with the mob allegedly attacking police personnel, throwing stones and petrol bombs and damaging public property.

 

The High Court observed that the “Sar tan se juda” slogan went beyond an expression of religious belief and "incites the people for an armed rebellion".

 

The court said it therefore could not be treated on the same footing as slogans that express devotion or respect towards a particular God or Guru.

 

“The said slogan cannot be equated to other slogans like ‘Nara-e-Takbir, Allahu Akbar’, ‘Jo Bole So Nihal Sat Sri Akal’, or for that matter ‘Jai Shri Ram’ or ‘Har Har Mahadev’, which are slogans expressing respect to the concerned God or Guru,” the court observed.

The court noted that Raza was not present at the spot when the violence took place. However, it said the case records indicated that he had called on members of the Muslim community to gather at Islamia Inter College after Friday prayers, despite the administration not permitting the meeting.

 

The court also referred to his alleged actions after the violence, including his purportedly thanking people who had responded to his call.

 

Based on these circumstances, the High Court rejected his bail application.