On July 20, Supreme Court granted bail to Mohammed Zubair, co-founder of Alt News, in all cases filed in different Police Stations in Uttar Pradesh. The Court also directed to club all FIRs registered with Delhi Police and UP Police, saying that they have offences of cognate nature. The investigation will be handled by one investigation authority, the Court added.
During the hearing of the matter related to multiple FIRs registered against Zubair, Advocate Vrinda Grover stated that Zubair had gotten bail in a case related to FIR registered by Delhi Police. Patiala House Courts had granted bail to Zubair in that matter. Calling him a journalist and a fact-checker, Grover alleged her client was being harassed by the system.
She further informed the Court that during the investigation, the Police added Section 35 of FCRA and Section 67 of the IT Act in the FIR and increased the scope of the investigation. She further said the Court that the investigating agencies are probing seven different tweets posted by Zubair over the time that allegedly hurt the sentiments of the complainants. One of such tweets was against Baba Bajrang Muni, whom Zubair had called ‘hate monger’ while publishing a tweet about the news channel debate that sparked a major controversy that led to the suspension of BJP’s former spokesperson Nupur Sharma.
Gover further claimed that there was no incitement in his tweets. She mentioned the FIR by a Sudarshan TV reporter about the tweet by Zubair where he had allegedly used a graphic created by Sudershan TV. She alleged that FIRs were being used to silence her client.
“Tweets may be different, but the tone of FIR and injury caused in all FIRs are the same. This is using criminal law machinery to harass and silence me,” she added. Grover also claimed there was a threat to Zubair’s life, and a bounty was allegedly announced against him.
UP AAG pointed out his tweets were distributed as pamphlets
Additional Advocate General (AAG) for the State of Uttar Pradesh informed the Court how his provocative tweets were used to instigate Islamists after Friday prayers. She said, “Subsequent to the TV debate on May 26, 2022, on June 5th and 6th, he has shown that the people from all over the world are supporting them why aren’t you coming forward to protest. These tweets were circulated as PAMPHLETS after Friday prayers.”
AAG mentioned that whenever he tweeted something provocative, he received additional funding via donations. She said, “The accused is not a journalist. He calls himself a fact checker. Instead of fact-checking, he posts tweets which are getting viral and spread venom and propagating people. He has been paid for these tweets and he gets paid more for the malicious tweets.”
She added, “He has admitted that he has received 2 crores for such tweets. 12 lakhs is his quota. the state is conscious that here is a person who instead of informing the police, he takes advantage of videos, speeches etc which can create a communal divide.”
AAG added that Zubair understands the importance of tweets. She said, “There were tweets of June 6 which said why are people not protesting. his tweets were circulated as pamphlets, and soon after, the people came out of prayers, and there was heavy violence.”
She said, “Accused from such violent scenes have admitted that they were given the pamphlets with tweets of Zubair printed. The State wants to ensure that there is no communal disharmony. it is not about general tweets, and there is general action.”
AAG further informed the Court that the SIT formed in the matter after looking at the gravity of the situation, and there was no conscious viciousness against the petitioner. She added, “State only wants to maintain communal harmony in the State of UP and nothing else. He is just increasing his followers through such tweets. He must be remanded to competent courts.”
AAG also mentioned the case of Loni, Ghaziabad, where an old man was beaten over personal enmity. However, the likes of Zubair gave it a communal angle. She said, “Please see what happened in Ghaziabad, Loni. this was the video of an old man who was taveez maker and that he was beaten up, he reported it in this manner, the incident happened on June 5, 2021, and nothing happens till FIR is lodged against unknown persons.”
She added, “He takes advantage of this video, tweets it to his lakhs of followers. then he writes all this to inflame the passions of people all over the country. then communal tension arises in Loni, Ghaziabad. It is found that on June 14 he tweeted and on June 15 police called him.” She pointed out that Zubair issued a written apology on June 28 last year in that matter.
SC granted bail in all cases filed in UP
In its order, the bench led by Justice DY Chandrachud detailed the FIRs registered against him under different sections in Delhi and several Police Stations of UP. The Court said the procurements of gadgets, documents, PAN cards, donation details and other relevant documents have already taken place.
The Court further added that even though he was granted bail in two of the multiple FIRs registered against him, he was “embroiled in a series of proceedings in UP”. The Court further added that it did not find any reason for Zubair’s deprivation of liberty to persist further. The Court directed his release on bail on each of the FIRs in UP.
The Court clarified that it had not quashed the FIRs but clubbed them as the offences were of the same nature. The Court transferred all the cases to Delhi Police, and its special cell will investigate further. The SIT formed by the UP government stood disbanded.
The Court ordered the release of Zubair on a bail bond of Rs 20,000 and directed the authorities to release him by 6 PM.
AAG argued that there must be restrictions on him from tweeting anything inciting.
However, the Court did not pass any orders restraining Zubair from tweeting anything derogatory or provocative stating the court cannot stop a “journalist from tweeting”. AAG again informed the court that he was not a journalist.
The Court said, “We cannot stop him from tweeting. We cannot anticipatorily interdict him from exercising his right to free speech. He will be answerable as per the law.” Before the mic was muted, Justice Chandrachud was heard saying, “we cannot say that he will not tweet again.” The court said he would be liable if he posts anything derogatory or inciting again.
