The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (8th April) termed certain posts made by propagandist and journalist Rana Ayyub on X relating to Hindu deities and freedom fighter V D Savarkar, as “highly derogatory, inflammatory and communal”. A Bench of Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav made the remarks while hearing a plea filed by advocate Amita Sachdeva before the High Court.
The High Court issued notices to Rana Ayyub, the Delhi Police and X, seeking their responses and directed the Delhi Police and X to take necessary action in the case. “Let the respondents take instructions and do the needful. Let them file a response by tomorrow. Let the matter be called the day after tomorrow. The action is necessary in view of the highly derogatory, inflammatory and communal tweets posted by Respondent Number 4 (Rana Ayyub) pursuant to which an FIR has been registered on the orders of a competent court. The matter requires urgent consideration. The official who represents Delhi Police is also directed to transmit necessary directions to Respondent Number 3 (X Corp). Let Delhi Police also be impleaded as a party,” the High Court observed.
Advocate Sachdeva had earlier approached the Saket Court for criminal action against Ayyub. In her complaint, Sachdeva referred to six posts made by Ayyub between 2013 and 2017, accusing her of insulting Hindu deities, Lord Ram and Mata Sita, and V D Savarkar.
“That upon reading the contents of the tweets, the Petitioner, being a follower of Sanatan Dharma, was deeply hurt and aggrieved as the posts prima facie contain insults against Hindu Deities, revered historical figures, and are capable of promoting communal disharmony,” Sachdeva said.
Based on Sachdeva’s complaint, the trial court observed that prima facie cognizable offences were made out against her, punishable under Section 153A (promoting enmity between different groups), 295A (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class) and 505 (statements conducing public mischief) of the IPC. The court ordered registration of an FIR against Ayyub and directed the Delhi Police to conduct an investigation. In May last year, the Delhi Police informed the court that Ayyub’s posts referred to by Sachdeva were no longer available on X. However, at least five of the six posts flagged by Sachdeva were available on X at the time of publication of this news article.
Sachdeva filed the current petition before the Delhi High Court seeking the deletion of Ayyub’s posts from X. Here are five of the six X derogatory and misleading posts of Ayyub, referred to by Sachdeva:
In March 2013, Rana Ayyub demeaned Lord Ram by claiming that he did not take a stand for his wife Sita, based on her distorted understanding of Ramayana. She even went to score Ravana, who abducted Sita as 1 and Lord Ram as 0. “…Ravana didn’t touch Sita even though he could. Ram didn’t stand for Sita even though he should have. Ravana 1 Ram 0,” Ayyub wrote on X.
In October 2014, Rana Ayyub again posted a tweet relating to Hindu religious figures of Sita, Ravana and Draupadi. “Gareeb Sita ke ghar pe kab tak rahegi Ravan ki hukmrani, Draupadi ka libas uske badan se kab tak chhina karega,” Ayyub wrote.
In May 2015, Ayyub made misleading claims regarding the ideology of VD Saravarkar in an X post where she claimed that he “advocated rape as a necessary component of Hindutva nationalism”.
In an X (then Twitter) post made in September 2015, Ayyub called V D Savarkar a “terrorist sympathiser” and posted an excerpt from what she claimed was Nathuram Godse’s account of Savarkar. Through the post, Ayyub tried to insinuate that Godse’s act of assassinating Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was somehow linked to Savarkar.
In July 2016, Ayyub made another misleading post on X, in which she posted a photo of a young boy having pellet gun injuries on his face. In the caption to the photo, she blamed the Indian Army for attacking the boy with pellet guns, which allegedly caused him to lose vision in both eyes. “Dear Indian army, am guessing this young kid was quite a threat to the sovereignty of India to be blinded for life,” Ayyub wrote in the post.
Ayyub’s claim was clearly misleading and defamatory, as the Indian Army does not use pellet guns.
The next date of the hearing in the case has been set on Friday (10th April).
