The arrest and conditional bail of Ashoka University professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad, whom the Supreme Court accused of seeking ‘cheap publicity’ and engaging in ‘dog-whistling’, has prompted the Constitutional Conduct Group (CCG) to come out in his support.
The group of former civil servants stated that it cannot be a crime to seek justice for victims of lynching and bulldozer demolitions, or to call for peace and restraint. Ali Khan Mahmudabad was arrested over his social media posts on Operation Sindoor, and CCG condemned the criminal charges against him as excessive, colonial in nature, and a threat to free speech.
The statement described the charges as both outrageous and absurd, asserting that Mahmudabad's posts merely expressed anguish over violence and made sincere appeals for peace. The group pointed out that while the professor had acknowledged the role of the Indian Army and raised concerns about communal violence and bulldozer-led demolitions, the primary message of his posts was to caution against the glorification of war and to mourn civilian casualties on both sides of the conflict.
The former bureaucrats said the invocation of several stringent provisions of the newly enacted Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita to prosecute the professor mirrored the language and intent of the repealed sedition law. They noted that the application of laws penalising threats to national sovereignty, disturbing communal harmony, and outraging religious sentiments had been misused in this case, even as hate speeches inciting violence continued to go largely unpunished.
The CCG criticised the apparent double standard in law enforcement, highlighting how open calls for ethnic cleansing and hate-filled speeches had not drawn similar legal attention, despite clear judicial directives. They pointed out that even in a recent instance where a state minister referred to Colonel Sofia Qureshi as a terrorist sympathiser, the police acted only after judicial intervention by the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
The statement also expressed disappointment over Ashoka University’s silence on the matter, although many students and faculty members actively protested the arrest and offered support outside the detention centre. The group commended the courage shown by Mahmudabad’s students, who described him as a committed teacher devoted to constitutional values and secularism.
Although the Supreme Court eventually granted Mahmudabad interim bail, the CCG raised concerns about the conditions imposed and the tone adopted by the bench. They viewed the court’s comments regarding the professor’s motives and the order to surrender his passport as disproportionate, and they questioned the logic of appointing a Special Investigation Team to interpret English-language posts that were clearly worded.
Further, the group criticised the court’s warning to Mahmudabad’s supporters and its prohibition against further commentary on the India-Pakistan conflict, arguing that such restrictions sent a chilling message at a time when divisive and inflammatory content was freely circulating online.
Recalling previous Supreme Court judgements affirming the right to dissent and urging the protection of unpopular opinions, the CCG described the treatment of Mahmudabad as indicative of an erosion of democratic norms. They warned that using criminal law to suppress peaceful and critical voices not only undermined intellectual life but also risked producing a conformist and intellectually barren society.