A case that tests the boundaries of expression in India

Last week, India’s Supreme Court granted bail to Ali Khan Mahmudabad, a professor with the prestigious Ashoka University, who had been arrested for a social media post on India’s Operation Sindoor. On merit and law, the arrest itself was a gross over reach and completely unwarranted. And yet, the country’s top court did not quash the case. Instead, it went on to gag the professor from speaking on the matter, castigated him for “dog whistling”, confiscated his passport and set up a probe team of police officers to study his post.

What did Professor Mahmudabad even say? His original post, which the Haryana police called “seditious”, strongly criticised Pakistan and praised India’s military response. He went on to express admiration for Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, who was one of the main faces of the daily press briefings, and also said that right wing commentators who were applauding her should also “loudly demand that the victims of mob lynchings, arbitrary bulldozing and others who are victims of hate mongering be protected as Indian citizens. The optics of two women soldiers presenting their findings is important, but optics must translate to reality on the ground otherwise it’s just hypocrisy”.

His post ended with this sentence: “The press conference shows that an India, united in its diversity, is not completely dead as an idea. Jai Hind.”

Soon afterwards he was arrested.

Appearing before the Supreme Court for the professor, senior lawyer Kapil Sibal argued that this was a patriotic post. Justice Surya Kant was dismayed and described it as “cheap popularity” while also threatening the students and teachers of Ashoka University for protesting against the arrest.

Importantly, on the same day as the bail hearing, the National Human Rights Commission or the NHRC took suo moto cognisance of Ali Khan Mahmudabad’s arrest, saying that prima facie, his human rights and liberty had been violated. A notice has been issued to the Director General of Police, Haryana, calling for a detailed report in the matter within one week.

The entire episode tells you about the state of free speech - where those who make real hate speeches are roaming free, but a professor who dared to highlight the hypocrisy of the right wing is arrested and hounded.

This case further throws light on civil liberties. Basic constitutional rights cannot be subjected to the whim of a judicial bench. It cannot be subjective based on who the judge is. These are rights that we as citizens enjoy under the law. During the height of the India-Pakistan tensions, Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri made a statement that criticising one’s own government was the hallmark of an “open and functioning democracy”.

Unfortunately, the case of Ali Khan Mahmudabad only proves the opposite. The police are quick to jump in and misuse provisions of the law based on flimsy complaints. But it is the duty of the courts to ensure that justice is done.