On 7th September (Monday), Maulana Tauqeer Raza Khan, the founder of the Ittehad-e-Millat Council, was denied bail in the September 2025 Bareilly violence case by the Allahabad High Court. According to Justice Ashutosh Srivastava, religious expressions including “Nara-e-Takbir, Allahu Akbar,” “Jo Bole So Nihal, Sat Sri Akal,” “Jai Shri Ram,” or “Har Har Mahadev” cannot be compared to the slogans raised by the cleric who is a prime accused in the matter.
The court pointed out that “Gustakh-e-Nabi Ke Ek Hi Saja, Sar Tan Se Juda,” (behead those who insult Prophet Muhammad) was distinct from chants that show reverence for a religious figure or deity. It accepted the state’s argument that the slogan constituted opposition to India’s integrity and sovereignty, as well as the rule of law. The judge highlighted that the slogan was “nothing but a challenge to the authority of law as also to the sovereignty and integrity of India” and “incites the people for an armed rebellion which is punishable under the law.”
Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh | The Allahabad High Court has refused to grant bail to Maulana Tauqeer Raza Khan, the president of the Ittehad-e-Millat Council and the prime accused in the Bareilly violence case. A single-judge bench presided over by Justice Ashutosh Srivastava…
— ANI UP/Uttarakhand (@ANINewsUP) September 8, 2026
Raza has been imprisoned after unrest transpired during an “I Love Mohammed” protest in Bareilly. The police complaint stated that he called for Muslims to assemble at Islamia Inter College on 26th September after Friday prayers. However, the authorities had refused to allow a rally. According to police, a large crowd marched toward Shyamganj Chauraha while holding signs and shouting slogans in defiance of section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
The court stated that the documents revealed that Raza “had admittedly to satisfy his religious and private political interests” and used the Friday namaz to mobilise a massive throng “to protest against the government action on the Muslim community and submit a memorandum to the President of India through the District Magistrate, Bareilly.”
“The call for such a large assembly was made without seeking permission from the local administration. The applicant has tried to justify that the call to assemble at the Islamia Inter College ground had been cancelled in the wake of the permission having been denied and imposition of Section 163 of the BNSS,” it outlined.
The police attempted to break up the gathering, but the mob chanted “Sar Tan Se Juda,” attacked the cops with stones and petrol bombs and opened fire. As a result, public property was vandalised, and several police personnel were hurt.
The judge expressed, “However, the fact remains that the masses of the Muslim community did undertake the march to the Islamia grounds and, when it was prevented by the police personnel, who were merely performing their duties to maintain the law and order, were manhandled by the crowd, which indulged in rioting and destruction of public property, resulting in injuries to police personnel which acts cannot be approved of.”
He was also critical of Raza’s activities following the incident, citing that the latter gave a speech in which he thanked the crowd for responding to his appeal in huge numbers and applauded their acts. He remarked, “The conduct of the applicant after the incident, by giving a speech thanking the masses for responding to the call in large numbers and applauding their acts, cannot also be approved of.”
Additionally, the court noted that even though the charge sheet was submitted on 21st December, the charges are yet to be framed and hence bail cannot be issued at this time.
