New Delhi: A Gurugram court has rejected the bail application of the Jamia shooter, who was arrested by the Haryana police recently after he gave a provocative speech at a mahapanchayat in Pataudi.
Judicial magistrate Mohammed Sageer, in a strongly worded order, said that giving hate speeches has become a ‘fashion’ and that those encouraging sectarian violence are doing more damage to the country than the COVID-19 pandemic.
The young man from Jewar, who was a minor when he shot a crowd of Jamia Millia students who were protesting against the Citizenship Amendment Act in early 2020, was arrested on July 12 after a complaint was filed against his speech at the mahapanchayat.
In the order, the judicial magistrate said that hate speeches go beyond causing distress to individual group members.
“It can have a societal impact. Hate speech lays the groundwork for later, broad attacks on vulnerable [sections] that can range from discrimination, to ostracism, segregation, deportation, violence and, in the most extreme cases, to genocide,” the order records.
Rejecting the argument of the petitioner’s counsel that the man is young and innocent, magistrate Sageer said, “The accused before the court is not a simple innocent young boy knowing nothing rather he is showing that what he has done in past, has now become capable to execute his hatred without any fear and also that he can move the mass[es] to [be] involve[d] in his hatred.”
The court referred to the fact that as per information given by the investigating officer, and admitted to by the counsels for the petitioner, this is the same person who had brandished an illegal weapon and opened fire at students of Jamia.
Though an FIR was registered at the New Friends Colony police station in Delhi at the time, he was a minor at the time. “The concession given by the courts of law due to his minority has not been taken in good sense by this accused. Rather it seems that he has taken the concession in wrong perspective that he can do anything, even to destroy the very fundamental feature of the constitution which we called ‘secularism’ by his hate speech,” the magistrate said.
“He has posed a real threat by his act that he will do whatever he wishes, what will the forces responsible for maintaining law, order and peace would do? He also posed a question to the state and to the courts of law whether it has power to uphold the Rule of Law?” the order says.
Every citizen has a right to express his thoughts but not in a which targets a particular community and while promoting enmity, the order said, noting that during his speech, the accused “can be seen instigating the mob for doing unlawful acts… instigating abduction of girls of a particular community and their forceful conversion”.
“He seems to be very proud of his antecedents. He even instigated to kill persons of a particular community and change slogans in this regard. Slogans and languages used by him, are clearly offensive and aimed to outrage the religious feelings of one particular group and promoting enmity between different groups/ religious community,” the magistrate said.
“Such activities cannot be tolerated in any civilised society. Hate speech based on religion or caste has become fashion nowadays. The police also seems to be helpless of dealing with such incidents. These kinds of activities are actually disturbing the secular fabric of our country and killing the spirit of the Constitution of India,” it says, adding that anyone who is a threat to the peace of the society and particularly to religious harmony cannot be allowed to roam freely.
“Such kind of people are actually disturbing the secular character of our nation and are the biggest impediment [to] nation building … the common man is under constant threat of violence in the name of religion, caste etc,” the order says.
The incident cannot be seen only as a young man’s religious intolerance because it has “far more serious and … dangerous hidden consequences”. If the accused is granted bail, the very existence of communal harmony may be disturbed and a wrong message will be sent that hate speeches are acceptable in society.
“The faith of common man has to be restored that the state is having [a] secular character and not in support of such kind of persons, promoting hatred and enmity in the name of religion, caste etc. It is the time to give a strong message to such anti-social elements who distribute hatred based on religion etc by way of hate speech that the Rule of Law still prevails,” the magistrate said.
Restraining the accused behind bars will send a strong message that India is an inclusive society where people of all faiths will flourish and have mutual respect. The court will also ensure that the rule of law reigns supreme, the order says.
“Our Constitution even gives protection to non citizens of India, then its the duty of the state as well as the judiciary to ensure that citizens of India of any religion or faith or caste should not feel unprotected and that such hate mongers cannot walk freely without any fear,” it says.
People like the accused are more dangerous that the COVID-19 pandemic, since the latter takes the “life of any person without seeing the religion or caste”. If any communal violence takes after hate speeches like the one the accused gave, then lots of “innocent lives will be lost only on the basis of religion and without any negligence on the part of such innocent people”.
The court was also wary of the fact that if released on bail, the accused may not indulge in unconstitutional and illegal activities once again, but could also impede the investigation by threatening the complainant and other witnesses.
“At this juncture, rights of the accused of his personal liberty cannot be preferred against the right of the society in peaceful communal harmony and balance lies in favour of the later,” the magistrate said.
The counsels for the petitioner argued that at the same mahapanchayat, several other persons had also given, hate speeches, but only the petitioner has been made an accused and was arrested “as he is outsider and has no political connection”. The counsel also argued that other orators, “who are powerful persons”, gave inflammatory speeches but no action has been taken against them. This shows the biased attitude of the Haryana police against his client, the counsel argued.
While the counsel did not name any persons, it was perhaps a reference to BJP spokesperson Suraj Pal Amu, who incited residents of Pataudi against Muslims.
Magistrate Sageer said that the court was informed that police has received a complaint only against the present accused and later if evidence is found during the investigation against other persons, they would also be arrested as per law.
Kaushik Raj and Alishan Jafri, in a piece for The Wire, had reported recently that the Jamia shooter’s social media posts contain a host of hate speeches that he has made at public events. Since he was let off on bail after shooting at CAA protestors last year, he has given at least three communal speeches which incite violence against Muslims. There also posts which suggest that the shooter and his ‘group’ may have shot and/or injured several people as part of vigilante violence under the garb of ‘cow protection’.
Jamia shooter bail denied by The Wire on Scribd