The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday ordered the release on interim bail of Ashoka University professor Dr. Ali Khan Mahmudabad, following his recent arrest over a social media post that sparked accusations of inciting communal discord and defaming women officers in the armed forces. However, the court refused to halt the ongoing investigation and emphasised the need for responsible speech, especially during sensitive times.
The professor, who heads the Department of Political Science at Ashoka University in Sonipat, Haryana, was taken into custody on May 18 after two FIRs were filed against him at the Rai Police Station. One of the complaints came from Renu Bhatia, Chairperson of the Haryana State Commission for Women (HSCW), while the other was lodged by Yogesh Jathedi, a village sarpanch. The charges include promoting enmity between different groups and undermining national integrity.
At the hearing, a bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N. Kotiswar Singh instructed the Haryana Director General of Police to form a three-member Special Investigation Team (SIT) by May 22 to probe the case further. Additionally, the court barred Mahmudabad from making public statements, publishing posts, or writing articles concerning the India-Pakistan conflict, the Pahalgam terror incident, or the ongoing investigation.
Justice Presented Deep Concerns About Mahmudabad’s Post
During the proceedings, Justice Kant raised serious concerns about the timing and tone of the professor’s post. “The country has faced a big challenge, and civilians were under attack. At this time, why are they trying to gain popularity?” he asked. He further commented, “Yes, everyone has the right to free speech and expression… Is it time to talk about all of this? The country is already going through all this… monsters came and attacked our people… we have to be united. Why to get cheap popularity on these occasions?”
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared on behalf of Mahmudabad, countered that the post did not incite communal violence and instead reflected a patriotic sentiment. He questioned the basis for the FIRs, asking, “Where is the criminal intent?” He also informed the bench that Mahmudabad’s wife is nine months pregnant, requesting leniency on humanitarian grounds.
The social media post in question had drawn attention for its reference to Colonel Sofiya Qureshi and Wing Commander Vyomika Singh, who were tasked with presenting updates on Operation Sindoor. In his commentary, Mahmudabad remarked: “… but perhaps they could also equally loudly demand that the victims of mob lynchings, arbitrary bulldozing and others who are victims of the BJP’s 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.”
HSCW Slams Remarks as Disparaging Women Officers
This statement prompted strong criticism from the HSCW, which claimed it denigrated women officers and sought to undermine their credibility. The Commission stated that the professor’s remarks amounted to “disparagement of women in uniform” and questioned his intentions.
In his defense, Mahmudabad clarified that his words had been distorted. “I am surprised that the Women’s Commission, while overreaching its jurisdiction, has misread and misunderstood my posts to such an extent that they have inverted their meaning,” he said.
Following his arrest, Mahmudabad was presented before a local court in Sonipat, where he was initially remanded to two days in police custody. On May 20, the court transferred him to judicial custody for 14 days, rejecting the state police’s request for an extension of the police remand. The court scheduled the next hearing for May 27.
SC Flags Post for Political Tension Amid National Tension
The Supreme Court bench noted that while parts of the post focused on the human cost of war, the overall message transitioned into pointed political criticism, which may have aggravated public sentiment during a period of national tension.
In the political sphere, the Congress party has condemned Mahmudabad’s arrest. Party president Mallikarjun Kharge criticised the ruling government, saying it reflects “how fearful the BJP is of any opinion which it dislikes.” He further denounced the misuse of power “either by fringe elements or through official state machinery” to suppress dissent.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, present during the hearing, was asked by the court to advise state authorities against registering further FIRs related to the same issue, to prevent overreach in the legal process.
Despite granting interim bail, the court’s stern remarks emphasised the importance of balancing free expression with the responsibility of maintaining public order. As the case proceeds, the SIT’s findings will likely play a crucial role in determining the legal standing of the professor’s controversial comments.
