In an open letter dated February 5, close to a dozen public intellectuals including Hiren Gohain, Harekrishna Deka, former DGP, Assam and author, Dr. Indrani Dutta, former Director, Omiyo Kumar Das Institute of Social Change and Development, among so many others, have, in a letter petition to CJ, Gauhati High Court, Justice Vijay Bishnoi drawn attention of the Court to series of inciteful statements by Himanta Biswa Sarma, chief minister and urged suo moto cognisance of offences committed by him.
In the communication, the signatories have stated that these series of public statements made by the Chief Minister of Assam, Shri Himanta Biswa Sarma, on their face, amount to hate speech, executive intimidation, and open vilification of a particular community commonly referred to as the “Miyan” or Bengal origin Muslim community. Over the course of more than 100 years they have become a part of the larger Assamese society by adopting the Assamese language and assimilating with the Assamese culture, says the communication. Besides, the letter states that the statements of the Chief Minister, delivered repeatedly in public forums, go far beyond political rhetoric and enter the prohibited constitutional zone of dehumanisation, collective stigmatisation, and threats of state-sponsored harassment.
In addition, the letter enumerates what they see violations of the Oath of Constitutional Office by the Chief Minister.
The entire letter may be read below:
February 5, 2026
To
The Hon’ble Chief Justice Gauhati High Court
Guwahati, Assam
Subject: Request for Suo Moto Cognisance of Repeated Hate Speech, Executive Interference, and Constitutional Violations by the Chief Minister of Assam
Respected My Lord,
We write this letter with profound faith in the constitutional role of the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court as guardian of the fundamental rights.
It is with deep concem that we draw the attention of this Hon’ble Court to a series of public statements made by the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Assam, Shri Himanta Biswa Sarma, which, on their face, amount to hate speech, executive intimidation, and open vilification of a particular community commonly referred to as the “Miyan” or Bengal origin Muslim community. Over the course of more than 100 years they have become a part of the larger Assamese society by adopting the Assamese language and assimilating with the Assamese culture. The statements of the Chief Minister, delivered repeatedly in public forums, go far beyond political rhetoric and enter the prohibited constitutional zone of dehumanisation, collective stigmatisation, and threats of state-sponsored harassment.
(A) Instigation for physical harm, economic discrimination and social humiliation
In a recent public statement Chief Minister of Assam instigated people to make people from Miyan community suffer, he categorically stated, “Whoever can, in whichever way should make Miyan suffer. If you board a rickshaw, if the fare is 5, pay them #4”. Such a statement, coming from the highest executive authority of the State, constitutes a direct call for physical harm, economic discrimination and social humiliation of the Miyan community, normalising
cruelty and stripping them of their inherent right to live with dignity as guaranteed under the Constitution.
(B) Direction to interfere in the Special Revision (SR) process
Equally alarming are public statements wherein the Hon’ble Chief Minister has stated that he has directed or ordered BJP party workers to file objections during the Special Revision (SR) process, particularly targeting members of the Miyan community, he has also said that the officers should work overtime to make Miyan suffer. This is a grave constitutional impropriety. A constitutionally mandated and quasi-judicial process such as the SR cannot be converted into a partisan or communal exercise at the behest of the Chief Minister. Such statements amount to executive interference, undermine institutional neutrality, and violate the principle of free and fair democratic processes, which form part of the basic structure of the Constitution. But, till now, the Election Commission authorities have not taken cognizance of such illegal interference in the SR exercise by the Assam Chief Minister and BJP workers.
Collectively, these utterances have a chilling effect on the right to life with dignity under Article 21, violate equality before law under Article 14, and erode fraternity, a core constitutional value expressly enshrined in the Preamble. They also strike directly at secularism, which the Hon’ble Supreme Court has consistently held to be part of the basic structure of the Constitution.
Violation of Constitutional Oath
Under Article 164(3) of the Constitution, the Chief Minister swears an oath to bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution and to discharge duties without fear or favour, affection or ill-will. Publicly singling out a religious community for suffering, economic deprivation, heightened scrutiny, and exclusion is fundamentally incompatible with this oath. Such conduct represents not merely political impropriety but a constitutional breach by a constitutional functionary.
Supreme Court Directions on Hate Speech
The brazen hate speech of the Assam Chief Minister is prejudicial to national integration and directly promotes enmity between different groups on grounds of religion. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India, has categorically directed that where instances of hate speech come to the notice of authorities, the police are duty-bound to register FIRs suo moto, irrespective of the identity or position of the speaker, and that failure to do so would invite contempt of wit Thace dirartinne are hindinn under Artide 141. Where the alleged violator is the
identity or position of the speaker, and that failure to do so would invite contempt of court. These directions are binding under Artide 141. Where the alleged violator is the Chief Minister himself, the ordinary executive machinery becomes structurally compromised, making judicial Intervention indispensable.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vishal Tiwari v. Union of India reiterated that any attempt to spread hate speech must be dealt with iron hand. The Supreme Court observed that, “Hate speech cannot be tolerated as it leads to loss of dignity and self-worth of the targeted group members, contributes to disharmony amongst groups, and erodes tolerance and open-mindedness, which is a must for a multi-cultural society committed to the idea of equality. Any attempt to cause alienation or humiliation of the targeted group is a criminal offence and must be dealt with accordingly.”
Secularism as Basic Structure
The Hon’ble Supreme Court has repeatedly reaffirmed that secularism is a basic feature of the Constitution, notably in S.R. Bommai v. Union of India, Abhiram Singh v. C.D. Commachen, and Aruna Roy v. Union of India. State power cannot be exercised to privilege or prejudice citizens on the basis of religion, nor can governance be infused with communal considerations. The statements and directions referred to above are plainly inconsistent with these binding constitutional principles.
In these extraordinary circumstances, we respectfully submit that this is a fit case for this Hon’ble Court to exercise its suo moto jurisdiction to:
- Direct competent authorities to register a case against hate speech, executive interference, and violations of fundamental rights;
- Protect the dignity, equality, and security of the affected community;
- Reaffirm that constitutional functionaries are bound by their oath and constitutional discipline; and
- Uphold public confidence in secular constitutional governance and the rule of law.
The intervention of this Hon’ble Court is crucial not only for the protection of a vulnerable community but also for preserving the constitutional equilibrium between executive power and fundamental rights. Silence or inaction in the face of such open constitutional transgressions risks normalising them and eroding the moral authority of the Constitution itself.
We submit this representation with utmost respect and hope that this Hon’ble Court will consider taking appropriate action in accordance with law.
Yours faithfully,
- Dr. Hiren Gohain, Scholar and public intellectual
- Harekrishna Deka, former DGP, Assam and author
- Thomas Menamparampil, former Archbishop Guwahati
- Ajit Kumar Bhuyan, Member of Rajya Sabha
- Dr. Dulal Chandra Goswami, Environmental Scientist
- D. Salka, retd. IAS
- Paresh Malakar, Editor-in-Chief, Northeast Now Duball hoswe upall
- Deepak Goswami, former Deputy Director General, NIC
- Lakhi Nath Tamuli, retd. IAS
- Jayanta Borgohain, retd. Deputy General Manager, IOCL
- Dr. Indrani Dutta, former Director, Omiyo Kumar Das Institute of Social Change and Development
- Robin Dutta, former Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, Assam
- Rashmi Goswami, Social Activist
- Najibuddin Ahmed, retd. Adl. Chief Engineer, PHED.
- Taufiqur Rahman Borborah
Related: