The Supreme Court on Wednesday sharply rebuked the Special Investigation Team (SIT) for its inability to comprehend the English language used in academician Ali Khan Mahmudabad’s social media posts, while directing the team to complete its investigation within four weeks and refrain from summoning him further.
Hearing his bail plea, the bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi observed that since Mahmudabad had already handed over his electronic devices, the SIT need not summon him again, and it asserted that the academician’s presence was no longer required for the inquiry, which appeared to have deviated from its core purpose.
The court remarked that the SIT seemed to be misdirecting itself in its probe into whether Mahmudabad’s social media posts constituted any offence, and asked investigators to restrict their focus solely to the contents of the posts that had triggered the filing of two FIRs.
The bench directed the SIT to complete its investigation within four weeks, while making it clear that Mahmudabad remained free to write articles and express his opinions, provided he refrained from commenting on matters currently under judicial consideration.
The court emphasised that it had no intention of interfering with the investigation, but underlined the need for the SIT to examine the actual language used in the posts and identify, if possible, the specific lines or paragraphs that may constitute an offence.
Two FIRs have been lodged against Mahmudabad — one by Haryana State Commission for Women Chairperson Renu Bhatia and another by BJP youth leader Yogesh Jatheri — over a Facebook post in which the academician had commented on the government's use of two women officers from different religious backgrounds to deliver briefings related to Operation Sindoor.
In the post, he raised concerns over the perceived performative nature of such representation while Muslims, he argued, continued to face systemic violence and discrimination in the country.
The SIT, however, is accused of pursuing a wide-ranging and unfocused investigation, which the court signalled as disproportionate, particularly given that the case originated from only two posts.
The Haryana State Commission for Women has alleged that Mahmudabad’s remarks insulted the Indian Army and disrespected women in uniform by casting doubt on their role in national representation, a claim the academician and his legal team have challenged as unfounded.