SC to hear Zubair’s plea against UP FIR as lawyer cites threat

The Supreme Court agreed to hear on Friday Alt News co-founder Mohammad Zubair’s petition challenging the Allahabad high court’s refusal to quash a First Information Report (FIR) against him in Uttar Pradesh, after his lawyer alleged he was facing death threats and pointed at the extreme urgency of the matter.

The FIR was filed against the journalist in Sitapur on June 1, on a complaint by Bhagwan Sharan, district president of local Hindu outfit Hindu Sher Sena, for allegedly inflaming communal passions by calling three controversial right-wing leaders “spreaders of hatred”. One of the three is Yati Narsinghanand Saraswati, priest of Dasna Devi temple in Ghaziabad, who is facing multiple charges in Delhi and Uttar Pradesh for alleged hate speeches at a Dharam Sansad in Haridwar last year. Zubair has been booked for promoting enmity between two groups and for misusing social media platforms.

On June 10, the Lucknow bench of Allahabad high court refused to quash the FIR against the journalist, saying the matter is at a “premature stage” and that there is “sufficient ground for investigation in the case”.

Taking note of the journalist’s plea, a bench of justices Indira Banerjee and J K Maheshwari in the top court gave the go-ahead for listing the matter on Friday

Mohammad Zubair

subject to clearance from the Chief Justice of India (CJI).

Zubair’s counsel Colin Gonsalves raised serious concerns over his safety. “...anticipatory bail has been rejected as premature. There are death threats. People on the other side are very anxious. They would kill him. This matter has to be heard urgently as we are worried about his safety,” he told the court.

The journalist also filed a separate application, citing a string of purported threats on Twitter and seeking immediate release from judicial custody of Delhi Police in connection with another case.

“Hundreds of tweets are being made on Twitter tagging the police authorities calling for ‘custodial violence’ of the petitioner and warning him of ‘consequences’ for the work he had been diligently doing,” the application filed through advocate Satya Mitra said.

“These online vigilante groups and accounts are baying for the life of the petitioner and have real-life consequences,” it added.