UP Police Arrests 19-Year-Old for Social Media Post Against Adityanath

Police have taken suo motu cognisance of painter Akram Ali’s WhatsApp status and charged him with promoting enmity, intent to insult religion and intentional insult to cause breach of peace.

New Delhi: Uttar Pradesh police arrested a 19-year-old boy on Monday, June 13, for “objectionable remarks” against Chief Minister Adityanath on social media.

Accused Akram Ali a.k.a. Gulbahar, a resident of Tetaria village which is within jurisdiction of the Khajni police station, is a painter, PTI has reported.

Police have claimed that he uploaded an “objectionable post against Adityanath” as his Whatsapp status at around 11 pm on Sunday and that it went viral.

Taking suo motu cognisance of the matter, Ali was booked under sections 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), 505 (creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill will between classes), 469 (forgery for harming reputation) and 295 (injuring or defiling place of worship with intent to insult the religion of any class) of the Indian Penal Code and also the Information Technology Act, Khajni police station in-charge, Iqrar Ahmad said.

In May this year, the Juvenile Justice Board in Uttar Pradesh ordered a 15-year-old boy to do 15 days of community service at a cow shelter, and then clean a public space for another 15 days after finding him guilty of sharing an “objectionable” post about Adityanath.

In March, a 24-year-old man was arrested in Gautam Buddh Nagar for allegedly posting objectionable pictures of chief minister Yogi Adityanath and former CM Mayawati on social media.

In May 2020, a case of sedition was registered against an Allahabad resident for allegedly making ‘objectionable remarks’ on Facebook about Adityanath.

The FIR in the case said, “Rajesh Kumar Shukla, a resident of Allahabad, had said in his Facebook post  ‘I do not understand why Priyanka Gandhi Vadra did not hire Uttar Pradesh Transport Corporation buses for migrant labourers?’

“On this post, a resident of Allahabad, Anoop Singh, made objectionable remarks against Yogi Adityanath. He said, “Yogi kutta hai is liye (because Yogi is a dog).”

Allahabad HC Quashes NSA Detention of Man for Post on Babri Masjid Over ‘Govt Delay’

The court, however, held that the man’s post was ‘provocative’, strikes at the root of the states’s authority, and is directly connected to public order.

New Delhi: The Allahabad high court has quashed the NSA detention of a man over a Facebook post on the Babri Masjid citing the Union government’s delay in processing it.

Bar and Bench has reported that a division bench of the high court comprising Justices Ramesh Sinha and Saroj Yadav said that Mohammad Faiyyaz Mansuri’s detention under the National Security Act was justified.

The court, however, highlighted that the Union government’s delay in disposing of Mansuri’s representation was disproportionate.

“…[W]e are of the view that the plea of the detenue/petitioner that there is delay in forwarding the petitioner’s representation on the part of the respondent no.1 (Union of India), has substance and on this count alone, the impugned detention order is liable to be quashed,” the court said.

The post

Mansuri had, in a Facebook post, written that the “Babri Masjid will be rebuilt like the Hagia Sophia in Turkey.”

Babri maszid ek din dubara banai Jayegi, jis tarah Turki ki Sofiya maszid banai gai thi,” Mansuri had written.

The Babri Masjid was demolished by Hindutva groups in 1992, and the landed was handed over to the Ram Temple trust by the Supreme Court in a 2019 judgment.

Turkey’s decision to convert the Hagia Sophia from a museum to a mosque came in 2020. The 900-year-old Byzantine church was turned into a mosque in 1453, became a museum in 1934 and then a mosque last year, under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

In August 2020, one Sagar Kapoor filed a complaint against Mansuri’s post and a case was registered under Section 67 of Information Technology Act and sections 153A (Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence), 292 (sale, etc., of obscene books), 505 (2) (statements creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill-will between classes), 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation), and 509 (word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman) of Indian Penal Code.

In the FIR, four persons were named as accused and the main accused was one Samreen Bano, who allegedly made abusive comments under the post.

Eventually, sections 292 and 509 were dropped and Section 295A (deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs) was added.

Mansuri was detained and jailed, following an order by the District Magistrate of Lakhimpur Kheri. Mansuri argued in his habeas corpus petition that Bano has not been arrested till date.

‘Provocative post’

The court held that Mansuri’s post was “provocative”, strikes at the root of the states’s authority and is directly connected to the public order, reported Bar and Bench.

The high court also said that the Indian constitution’s guarantee of freedoms and personal liberty to all people should not be “misused.”

“However, it should be kept in mind by one and all that the constitutional guarantee of such freedoms and liberty is not meant to be abused and misused so as to endanger and threaten the very foundation of the pattern of our free society in which the guaranteed democratic freedom and personal liberty is designed to grow and flourish,” the order said.

‘Delay’

But the court took into account Mansuri’s plea that the government’s affidavit “did not contain a day-to-day explanation while dealing with the petitioner’s representation between October 25, 2020 to November 11, 2020.”

LiveLaw has reported the court as having noted that the government had received his representation on October 12, 2020, but processed it on October 21, 2020.

Further, while Mansuri’s representation was rejected on November 13, it was communicated to him only on November 17, the court said.

“Having regard to the nature of detention and rigour of law, we are of the view that there was a disproportionate delay at the end of the Central Government,” the court said

Facebook Removes Rahul Gandhi’s Post With Photos of Family of Delhi Dalit Girl

The social media giant said the post violates Indian law and also its own policy.

New Delhi: Facebook-owned Instagram on Friday took down a post by Rahul Gandhi which had pictures of the Congress leader meeting the parents of the nine-year-old Dalit girl who was allegedly raped and killed in Nangal area of Delhi Cantonment.

According to the Indian Express, Facebook said the post was in violation of its policy and the company has informed Gandhi that the post had been taken down, along with the reasons for doing so.

Gandhi’s post has caused controversy since the law does not allow the identity of a minor victim or her family to be revealed if sexual assault is alleged. Earlier, Twitter had deleted the post and then locked Rahul Gandhi’s account, along with several other Congress handles, for sharing the same post. The accounts were later unlocked.

The National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) had asked various social media platforms to take action against Gandhi’s post. The child rights body had also summoned Facebook on August 13 and subsequently, the social media giant wrote to Gandhi and asked him to remove the pictures.

“According to NCPCR’s August 10, 2021 notice, a post you uploaded through your Instagram account, is unlawful under Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015; Section 23 of the POCSO, 2012; and Section 288A of the Indian Penal Code. In accordance with NCPCR’s notice, you are requested to remove this post expeditiously,” Facebook had said in its e-mail to Gandhi, according to IE.

Also Read: What the Law Says About Rahul Gandhi Sharing a Photo of His Meeting With Rape Victim’s Parents

The report adds that after Facebook provided the NCPCR with a copy of the letter it had sent to Gandhi, the child rights panel exempted the social media company from the summons.

The Congress and Gandhi himself have been critical of social media companies for bowing to government demands to remove his posts. Last week, Gandhi accused Twitter of being “biased and interfering in the country’s political process” after it suspended his account termporarily.

“It’s obvious now that Twitter is actually not a neutral, objective platform. It is a biased platform. It’s something that listens to what the government of the day says,” he charged in a video message posted on social media.

“By shutting down my Twitter they are interfering in our political process. A company is making its business to define our politics. And as a politician I don’t like that,” he said.

Assam CID Arrests State Chief Secretary’s Brother in Police Exam Paper Leak Scam

SP Kumar Sanjit Krishna is the highest-ranked serving officer of the Assam government arrested so far in the scam that has rocked the state.

Guwahati: The Assam CID Thursday arrested superintendent of police Kumar Sanjit Krishna, who is the brother of the state chief secretary in connection with the police exam paper leak scam in the state.

Krishna is the highest-ranked serving officer of the Assam government arrested so far in the scam that has rocked the state, giving the much-needed ammunition to the opposition just six months before the Assembly polls.

Krishna is the brother of chief secretary Kumar Sanjay Krishna.

A senior official told PTI that Sanjit Krishna was arrested by the CID after completing his medical check-up, which was done following a series of marathon interrogation over the last few days.

“He will be produced before a court tomorrow and we will seek his custody,” the official said.

Sanjit Krishna, who was suspected to be absconding on Wednesday, reached the state police headquarters here at around 11 am and was questioned by top Assam police officials the whole day, a source in it told PTI.

At around 6 pm he was detained and the CID sleuths took him to their headquarters, which is about 200 m away. His medical check-up followed.

The senior police officer was interrogated for long hours on Monday and Tuesday too by the top brass of Assam Police.

Krishna was the SP of Karimganj district, where the question paper was allegedly leaked at his behest in his residence in the presence of other accused persons in the scam, some of whom have already been arrested.

The SP, who is a senior officer of the Assam Police Services, was transferred to Barpeta district as the superintendent of police of the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) on October 11, 2020, which was a Sunday raising questions over the investigation.

His official residence at Karimganj was searched on Sunday and Tuesday, while his personal house was searched by the CID on Wednesday.

Assam Chief Secretary Kumar Sanjay Krishna had said in a Facebook post on Tuesday that if his brother has done something wrong then “law will take its own course on the basis of evidence”.

Also read: 10,000 Ineligible Names To Be Deleted From Final NRC In Assam

“As Chief Secretary, I have been supporting on independent and neutral enquiry from the beginning … and I believe whoever is guilty will be brought to justice,” he had added.

So far multiple agencies of the Assam Police have arrested 51 people from different parts of the state and outside it, including retired DIG Prasanta Kumar Dutta and BJP leader Diban Deka who was later expelled from the party.

The police have so far registered five cases across the state.

The CID has arrested 21 people so far, while the Nalbari police have taken in 14 others. The crime branch of Guwahati Police has arrested 11 persons and the Lakhimpur district police five others. There has been no arrest yet against the case registered at Diphu in Karbi Anglong district.

The CID had searched the house of Dutta’s employee Jaydip Borooah, who was in hospital following the detection of COVID-19 and seized 24,88,300, an Assam Police spokesperson said.

With this, nearly Rs 5.65 crore cash has been recovered from different places in the state in connection with the scam, he added.

On September 20, 2020, the question paper of the written examination for 597 posts of unarmed sub-inspectors in Assam Police was leaked and the State Level Police Recruitment Board (SLPRB) cancelled the test minutes after it had commenced across the state that day.

Around 66,000 candidates had downloaded their admit cards for appearing in the written tests in 154 centres spread over all the districts.

SLPRB Chairman Pradeep Kumar had later resigned owning moral responsibility for the scam and the state government had reconstituted the board with the director-general of police as its chairman.

Telangana: Man Arrested for ‘Objectionable’ Facebook Post Against Chief Minister

“The people and netizens are cautioned not to resort to such practices of spreading viral, derogatory, objectionable videos,” Police Commissioner Mahesh Bhagwat said.

New Delhi: A 24-year-old Telangana man, Chinnam Balachander, has been arrested for what the state police has described as a “highly derogatory/objectionable” Facebook post against Telangana chief minister K. Chandrashekar Rao (KCR) and some other political leaders.

Balachander, who is a resident of Uppal in Hyderabad and works at an automobile showroom in Hyderabad, is an active member of a Facebook page called “Spirit of Telangana” that shares posts related to Telangana politics and has over 62k likes.

Using an assumed name, Balachander posted a morphed photograph of the chief minister lying eyes closed on a hospital stretcher surrounded by nurses. The accompanying text, in Telugu written in the Roman script, said “KCR has died of Corona and the virus entered through his nose”. The post – clearly in bad taste though lawyers are bound to contest the claim that it broke any law – was uploaded with an assumed name, ‘Panyala Raju’,

A constable at the Cyber Crime police station made a complaint against Balachander’s post on the page which led to his arrest on Friday.

He has been booked under sections 501 (printing or engraving matter known to be defamatory), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), 505 (statements conducing to public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code and section 67 of IT Act, which deals with obscenity.

Also read: KCR Scorns Media, but Doctors’ Protest Reveals Lapses in Government Handling of COVID

The police said he had uploaded “abusive and most derogatory comments” against the chief minister. The post has been removed after the police urged Facebook to do so.

“Police seized a Samsung smart phone from the accused and it is based on the technical evidence that the cyber offender was arrested,” read a press note issued by Police Commissioner Mahesh Bhagwat.

“The people and netizens are cautioned not to resort to such practices of spreading viral, derogatory, objectionable videos/postings and thus, defaming the government or individuals who are part of the Government. If in case they resort to such activities on social media, they will have to face severe consequences as per the law,” Bhagwat added.

The police further said the arrest was a warning to those who defame the government. “It (the post) was most objectionable and abusive in nature. One should not do some cut-copy-paste work using photos and use abusive comments against the chief minister. One should at least respect the post,” a senior officer told the Indian Express.

HC Dismisses Plea of Manipur Student Activist Booked for Sedition

Thokchom was arrested on February 15 and charged with sedition for a Facebook post critical of the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill.

New Delhi: The Delhi high court on Monday dismissed a Manipur student activist’s plea challenging his arrest and transit remand here in a sedition case lodged against him for making remarks over the Citizenship Bill on social media.

Justice Sunil Gaur dismissed activist Veewon Thokchom’s plea who was arrested by Manipur police in Delhi on February 15.

The court had earlier reserved order on the plea.

Thokchom filed the petition through his brother seeking quashing of the transit remand claiming it to be defective.

His counsel argued that the transit remand order suffered from non-application of mind.

Also read: Manipuri Student Who Led Protests Against Citizenship Bill in Delhi Arrested

Counsel for Manipur police had contended that misleading facts were being placed before the court by the activist’s lawyer and he would be taken to Manipur to be produced before the concerned court tomorrow.

The high court had earlier in the day, transferred the petition to another bench for hearing it today itself due to some technical issues.

Thokchom’s counsel had claimed that the 23-year-old youth’s arrest was illegal and after going through the FIR, no criminal offence was being made out.

He was arrested and charged with sedition for a Facebook post critical of the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill. The petition has made state of Manipur and Delhi police as parties.

If convicted, the offence of sedition could entail a maximum punishment of life imprisonment.

Robert Vadra Questioned by Enforcement Directorate for 5.5 Hours

It is for the first time that Vadra, is appearing before any probe agency in connection with criminal charges of allegedly dubious financial dealings.

New Delhi: Robert Vadra, the brother-in-law of Congress chief Rahul Gandhi and the husband of Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, on Wednesday was questioned by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for about 5.5 hours in its money laundering probe into alleged possession of illegal foreign assets, days after he was directed by a city court to appear before the central probe agency.

Vadra’s wife, Priyanka Gandhi accompanied him in a white Toyota Land Cruiser and dropped him outside the ED’s office in Jamnagar House, a move seen as sending a political message to Congress’s opponents ahead of Lok Sabha polls.

Vadra left the office at about 9:40 pm alone in the same car in which Priyanka had dropped him.

His lawyer said Vadra has replied to every question that was put to him.

“All charges against him are wrong. We will cooperate with the agency 100%. He will come whenever he is called,” Suman Jyoti Khaitan, his lawyer told the media persons waiting outside the ED office.

Officials said Vadra has been called again on Thursday.

Priyanka, shortly after dropping her husband, took charge as All India Congress Committee (AICC) general secretary in-charge of Uttar Pradesh east, after her formal induction into the Congress party on January 23.

“He is my husband, he is my family…I support my family,” Priyanka said in support to Vadra, who returned from London earlier in the day.

Priyanka was asked by newsmen at the AICC headquarters, whether she was sending any message by dropping her husband at the ED office.

Asked if it was a political vendetta, she said everyone knows why this is being done.

On the day of Priyanka’s appointment, Vadra had sent an emotional message to her. “Congratulations P… always by your side in every phase of your life. Give it your best,” Vadra had written in a Facebook post.

It is for the first time that Vadra, son-in-law of Sonia Gandhi, is appearing before any probe agency in connection with alleged criminal charges of dubious financial dealings.

After wading through a posse of assembled media persons, Vadra entered the ED office at around 3:47 pm, minutes after a team of his lawyers reached the premises. He then signed the attendance register before being taken in for questioning.

Vadra has denied allegations of possessing illegal foreign assets and termed them a political witch hunt against him. He has alleged he was being ‘hounded and harassed’ to subserve political ends.

Ahead of the questioning by a team of three ED officials, official sources said Vadra was put through a dozen questions on transactions, purchase and possession of certain immovable assets in London and his statement was recorded under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

It is understood he was also grilled about his links with absconding and controversial defence dealer, Sanjay Bhandari and Bhandari’s relative Sumit Chhadha, in connection with certain e-mails recovered by agencies linked to the renovation of a London-based property.

Vadra was directed by a Delhi court on February 2, to cooperate with the probe being carried out by ED after he knocked at its door seeking anticipatory bail in the money laundering case.

The court directed him to appear before ED on Wednesday on his return from London.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) seized on the questioning of Vadra to attack the Congress and alleged he got kickbacks from a petroleum and defence deals which took place during the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) regime.

BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra alleged at a news conference that Vadra bought eight to nine properties in London from the money he got as kickbacks from a petroleum and a defence deal, which took place in 2008-09. Patra did not provide any evidence to back his claim.

Congress spokesperson Abhishek Manu Singhvi claimed the charges against Vadra are “fickle, superficial, non-existent, non-substantive”.

The BJP had full four and a half years to investigate but could not find anything, he claimed at a news conference.

The attempt is to mislead, confuse and to create an ambience before the election, but people see through this, he said.

The ED case against Vadra relates to allegations of money laundering in the purchase of a London-based property located at 12, Bryanston Square worth 1.9 million GBP (British pounds), which is allegedly owned by him.

The agency had also told the court that it has received information about various new properties in London which belongs to Vadra, including two houses of five and four million each, six other flats and more properties.

The ED had carried out raids in the case in December last year and grilled his aide Manoj Arora, an employee of a firm linked to Vadra, Skylight Hospitality LLP.

The agency had told the court that it filed a PMLA case against Arora, after his role cropped up during the probe of another case by the Income Tax Department under the 2015 anti-black money legislation against absconding Bhandari.

It had alleged that the London-based property was bought by Bhandari for GBP 1.9 million and sold in 2010 for the same amount despite incurring additional expenses of approximately GBP 65,900 on its renovation.

“This gives credence to the fact that Bhandari was not the actual owner of the property but it was beneficially owned by Vadra who was incurring expenditure on the renovation of this property,” the ED had claimed before the court.

Arora was a key person in the case and he was aware of Vadra’s overseas undeclared assets, ED had alleged.

Criticism of a Judge on Facebook is Not Contempt, Says Supreme Court

The judgment was contradictory to the contempt notice issued by the court to former Supreme Court Justice Markandey Katju, prompting experts to suggest laying down of consistent principles.

New Delhi: A Supreme Court bench, on Monday, set aside a Punjab and Haryana high court order issued on May 31, convicting and sentencing an advocate for one month’s simple imprisonment at Narnaul jail in Haryana for a Facebook post in which he was critical of a high court judge.

The details of the case are similar to the notice of contempt of court issued against former judge of the Supreme Court, Justice Markandey Katju, for his Facebook post criticising a judgment delivered by a bench presided by Justice Ranjan Gogoi, presently the CJI. Justice Katju opted to apologise to the bench for his remarks, leading to the closure of the case against him.

The details of the high court case

On May 31, a division bench of the Punjab and Haryana high court sentenced an advocate-cum-journalist, Maneesh Vashistha, to simple imprisonment for one month, after suo motu finding him guilty of contempt of court. His offence: he alleged in a Facebook post that the judgment passed against him by Justice Inderjit Singh of the high court was not a speaking order and that a better decision could have been written by a magistrate.

Vashistha is an advocate practicing at Narnaul district and is also a correspondent for Punjab Kesri (Hissar edition).

Also Read: Contempt Notice to Ex-Judge Markandeya Katju Ignores Supreme Court’s Own Rulings

Vashistha also wrote that the judge had not uploaded the judgment as he might not have understood what was to be written. On learning about the Facebook post from the litigants who were arraigned against Vashistha in a case before him, Justice Inderjit Singh initiated contempt proceedings against him, but directed the registry to put up the case before some other bench, after taking appropriate orders from the chief justice of the high court.

The case was then heard by the division bench of justices M.S. Bedi and Hari Pal Verma.

“Such a derogatory remark is contemptuous on the face of it as such the contemnor is held guilty of having committed contempt of court,” the bench wrote in its judgment, while directing him to surrender to undergo imprisonment on July 31. The high court decided to sentence him as he did not furnish any apology or express remorse. However, Vashishth pleaded that he should be shown leniency on account of his being an advocate.

In its judgment, the division bench of the high court rejected Vashishth’s contention that the court could not be a prosecutor and a judge of its own cause. It held, citing the Supreme Court’s judgment in Delhi Judicial Service Association’s case that the Supreme Court and the high court, being the court of record, shall have the powers as well as the duty to protect the authority and dignity of courts.

The division bench of the Punjab and Haryana high court rejected Vashishth’s contention that the court could not be a prosecutor and a judge of its own cause. Credit: Wikimedia Commons CC BY-SA 3.0

Citing another case, R.L. Kapur v State of Madras (1972), the division bench of the high court held that under Article 215 of the Constitution, the high court as a court of record possesses inherent power and jurisdiction, which is a special one, not arising or derived from Contempt of Courts Act and the provisions of Section 3 of 1926 Act.

It was specifically held in that case that under Article 215 of the Constitution, no law made by a legislature could take away the jurisdiction conferred on the high court nor it could confer it afresh by virtue of its own authority. The high court, therefore, held that it has got wide inherent power to punish for contempt not only of subordinate courts, but of the high court itself.

“The objective of the contempt proceedings is not to punish a contemner for insult of a particular judge, but for saving the dignity of the judicial system. In case the punishment is not awarded to a person, who by his publication scandalises and lowers the authority of not only the Court but has lowered the authority of the judiciary in the eyes of general public…the faith of the general public in the judiciary will be shattered,” the high court had held in its order.

It added:

The dignity and authority of the court has to be maintained not only by the general public but also by the advocates who constitute an important part of the system of administration of justice and are considered as officers of the Court.

Supreme Court’s order

On Monday, November 12, a Supreme Court bench of justices A.K. Sikri and R. Subhash Reddy set aside the high court order, on an appeal from the contemner. The high court, which had taken suo motu action against the appellant, did not opt to be represented before the Supreme Court, despite issue of notice.

Also Read: Supreme Court Sets Aside Contempt Proceedings Against Outlook Journalists

The high court had suspended the sentence till the reopening of the Supreme Court in July, to enable Vashistha to appeal. On July 30, Justice S. Abdul Nazeer of the Supreme Court allowed his application for exemption from surrendering before the chief judicial magistrate of Narnaul on July 31, to avoid being imprisoned in the meantime.

On August 27, a Supreme Court bench of justices A.K. Sikri and Ashok Bhushan stayed the high court order.

On Monday, allowing Vashistha’s appeal, the bench observed: “We have gone through the matter in detail and are of the view that it was not a case where the contempt action should have been taken against the appellant who is an Advocate.”

Markandey Katju chose to apologise to the bench for his remarks. Credit: PTI

Similarity with Justice Katju’s case

Vashistha’s success in the Supreme Court offers an interesting contrast to Justice Katju’s own travails in the apex court for his Facebook post, which invited a contempt notice from a Justice Gogoi-led bench.

The order issuing the notice refers to Justice Katju’s blog, wherein he explains a “grave error” in the judgment delivered by a bench presided over by Justice Gogoi, and adds that “it is not expected of judges who had been in the legal world for decades”. The order reproduces another sentence from the blog as follows:

“Even a student of law in a law college knows this elementary principle that hearsay evidence is inadmissible.”

Justice Katju made this comment in the context of his criticism that the bench committed a serious error in admitting the hearsay evidence of a bystander. In the Soumya murder case, which was before the Supreme Court in the review proceedings, the bench acquitted the accused, Govindachamy, of murder charges, even though it found him guilty of assault and rape and sentenced him to life imprisonment.

Critics suggest that such conflicting decisions about the judiciary’s contempt powers indeed call for laying down consistent principles to protect free speech.

UP Teen Arrested, Beaten in Jail Over Facebook Post on Yogi, River Ganga

After he received bail, sedition charges were also allegedly added.

After he received bail, sedition charges were also allegedly added.

Zakir was targeted for questioning the logic of granting “legal person” status to the Ganga. Credit: PTI

New Delhi: A teenaged Muslim boy was allegedly arrested by the Uttar Pradesh police and charged with hacking after posting a Facebook status update on the recent court ruling on rivers Ganga and Yamuna, The Telegraph reported.

Eighteen-year-old Zakir Ali Tyagi described his arrest and release while speaking at the meeting of the Bhim Army Defence Committee at the Press Club of India in Delhi on Tuesday, where many others also described their plight under the Adityanath rule in UP.

According to Tyagi, after the Uttarakhand high court termed the Ganga and Yamuna rivers as ‘living entities’ and gave them legal rights, he had updated his Facebook status to: “The Ganga has been declared a living entity; will criminal charges be initiated if someone drowns in it?”

He claims to have been forcefully picked up by the police from his home, which he shares with his employer, and charged under Section 66 of the Information Technology Act that deals with hacking and could could lead to a jail term of three years.

Zakir told the Telegraph that he was targeted for questioning the logic of granting “legal person” status to the Ganga.

The Telegraph report said the FIR accused Tyagi of posting ‘galat tareeke ke (wrong type of) comments” on Facebook.

Wasiq Nadeem Khan, Tyagi’s legal aid, told the Telegraph, “The police had initially registered the FIR under Section 66A, which prescribes three years’ jail for offensive posts, unaware that the Supreme Court had struck it down as unconstitutional in March 2015. When they realised the mistake, they merely dropped the letter ‘A’.”

Zakir, through Facebook, had also taken a jibe at the BJP’s temple politics in UP. His status read, “The government’s promise on the Ram Mandir was nothing but a gimmick, which will be made before the next polls again to lure voters, like the promise to send mullahs to Pakistan.”

The Telegraph report said he was also booked for cheating for using a murdered policeman’s image as his profile picture as part of a campaign to seek justice for the officer. The picture was of Akhtar Khan, a police officer killed on duty in Greater Noida.

Zakir told the Telegraph that he was beaten in prison. “I was locked up at Kotwali Nagar police station. Later that night, a man in a yellow T-shirt, jeans and shoes entered the cell and asked which of us was Zakir. When I raised my hand, he kicked and punched me till I lay writhing on the floor.”

“He abused me and said that people would stone my house and call me a terrorist as I had written against the government. I was never taken to a doctor but a medical report was produced in court saying I was in good health,” he went on to say.

After he received bail, sedition charges were allegedly added.

Zakir, who is pursuing a bachelor’s degree through correspondence from Swami Vivekanand Subharti University, Meerut, is going to approach the Allahabad high court for quashing the sedition case.