The reported hate speeches repeatedly denigrate Muslim community by spreading conspiracy theories about ‘love jihad’, ‘land jihad’, and ‘population jihad’, apart from threatening physical violence and social ostracisation. The now demolished Babri Masjid and Madrasas remain other sites of constant barrage by the speakers.

This week, on April 8, 2024, we dispatched all the three complaints to the Superintendents of Police (SPs) and District Magistrates (DMs), urging prompt action, beginning with registration of complaints and investigation in these cases. Additionally, all the complaints sent through email have been marked to the Director General of Police (DGP) of the state, Rashmi Shukla. Evidence of the videos of these controversial speeches have also been provided. In these complaints, CJP has urged registration of offences under IPC Sections 153A (promoting enmity) and 505 (statements conducing public mischief). We have invoked the binding judicial order of the Supreme Court in the Shaheen Abdullah vs Union of Indian (Writ Petition (Civil) 940/2022), which mandate the police to suo moto register cases in incidents of hate speeches, as per the relevant provisions of the law. 

Details of the hate speeches

Ghatkopar 

On March 10, Nitesh Rane delivered a fiery hate speech at the event organized by Sakal Hindi Samaj in Ghatkopar, urging members of Hindu society to boycott Muslim hawkers, whom he indirectly referred as Jihadis and illegal Bangladeshi Rohingyas. He assurance the crowd that the government is on their side and not to worry about anything else, suggesting violence against them. Importantly, Rane was previously booked by Mumbai Police for giving anti-Muslim hate speech during this Solapur rally in January 2024. 

The extract from his Ghatkopar speech reads, “Take an oath, if you see any hawker anywhere…we will not allow him to stand here. And if we still see him standing here, we will not apply saffron on ourselves again. Keep in mind, everything was caught on camera! The more you show this, the more these Jihadis, these Bangladeshi Rohingyas will think of destroying Mumbai, so please keep in mind. If any hawker here sees us from tomorrow, I will tell all my Hindu brothers, my brothers, sisters, friends, the government is with you, don’t worry about anything.”

In this case, we sent our complaint to Balwant Deshmukh (Senior Police Inspector, Ghatkopar Police Station) and Rajendra Shankar Kshirsagar (Collector and District Magistrate, Mumbai Suburban District) asking them to invoke IPC Sections 153A, and 505 (1) and (2).

The complaint may be read here:

Akola 

Another speech by Nitesh Rane was reported from the event organised by Sakal Hindu Samaj on 18 February in Nimba village, Balapur, Akola. In this speech Rane charged at Muslims, and alluding to Babri Masjid and Tipu Sultan, accused them of Islamising historical monuments and places. Furthermore, he engaged in fearmongering by falsely claiming that Muslims are on a mission to reduce Hindu population, thus promoting fake conspiracy theory, often named ‘population jihad’. 

The extract from his Akola speech reads, “…Now there is no benefit in further insulting the person whose name is Jalil. His parents have named him Jalil. What else should I do to him? But remember, brothers, the purpose for which he came here. The miscreants here are doing the work of reducing the population of the Hindu community, driving away the Hindu community from here and creating an Islamic nation in the name of this party…These people are praising Tipu. What did that bastard do…if anyone has converted more Hindus, it is Tipu…And the name of that Tipu has been given to our auditorium here…You should change that name in time otherwise Nitesh Rane will blacken that board and you will not be able to do anything.”

In this case, we sent our complaint to Bachchan Singh (Superintendent of Police, Akola) and Ajit Kumbhar (Collector and District Magistrate, Akola) asking them to invoke IPC Sections 153A, and 505 (1) and (2).

The complaint may be read here:

Mahabaleshwar 

A senior lawyer and BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay made a divisive speech at the event in Mahabaleshwar on January 26, attacking Madrasas and asking for the removal of minority status of Muslims. His speech, employing a now familiar theory of population jihad, argued that Muslims have abundant majority, and are unduly influencing electoral process. He went on to allege that even our election to select MLAs and MPs is ostensibly overpowered by the Muslim population. Notably, Upadhyay was previously booked by Delhi Police for organising an event at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi in 2021 during which provocative slogans were raised against Muslim community.

The extract from his Mahabaleshwar speech reads, “There is a disturbance across the world due to Madrasas. Is there unrest or not? …In those Madrasas in which they do not teach Indian culture, tradition, or way of life, why should we run such schools? Those who are numbered in crores, they decide who will be your MP or MLA, that community which determines the winning margin (of a candidate), and decides who will your councillor, Pradhan, MLA, or MP, does that community deserve the status of minority? There is no need of minority in India.”

In this case, we sent our complaint to Sameer Shaikh (Superintendent of Police, Satara) and Jitendra Dudi (Collector and District Magistrate, Satara) asking them to invoke IPC Sections 153A, and 505 (1) and (2). 

The complaint may be read here:

Related:

CJP continues to fight against hate, submits police complaints in 7 instances of hate speech delivered by leaders in Maharashtra since January 2024

Several instances of hate speech in March and April mar the election cycle, demonise religious minorities before the polls 

Study reveals 668 hate speech cases in 2023, BJP major player

The post CJP files three more police complaints against hate speeches delivered by Nitesh Rane and Ashwini Upadhyay appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a ‘public interest litigation’ (PIL) petition filed by BJP leader and advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, which sought for the renaming of such historical places and cities that, as was claimed by him, are currently named after “foreign barbaric invaders”. By allusion if not direct mention he had targeted those monuments and cities that bore a Persian origin.

The Supreme Court bench of Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna came down heavily on the petitioner for what it saw as a violation of the Constitution’s secular principles. The bench asked Upadhyay if he wanted to “keep the country on the boil” by filing such petitions.

Submissions made by Upadhyay in his PIL

Upadhyay’s petition, filed through advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey, urged the Supreme Court to direct the Home Ministry to form a Renaming Commission, the aim of which will be to determine the historical names of places renamed by “barbaric foreign invaders”, in order to preserve India’s sovereignty and secure other fundamental rights. It also requested that the Central and State governments to update their websites and records, which numbered in the thousands.

Alternatively, it was requested that the Archaeological Survey of India be directed to compile a list of such names in accordance with Article 19 of the Indian Constitution, which provides the citizens with the right to know.

“We are celebrating the 75th anniversary of independence but there are many ancient historical cultural religious places in the name of brutal foreign invaders, their servants and family members… successive governments have not taken steps to correct the barbaric act of invaders and the injury is continuing,” the plea stated, as was provided by the Bar and Bench.

In his petition, Upadhyay had further submitted that many historical sites mentioned in the Vedas and Puranas are now named after “foreign looters”.

“We have roads named after Lodhi, Ghazni, Ghori….there is no single road named after Pandavas, though Indraprastha was built by Yudhishtir….Faridabad is named after a looter,” he explained. “What is the relationship of Aurangazeb, Lodhi, Ghazni, and others with India?” he had inquired in his petition.

Through his plea, he had stated that the constitutional protections provided under our law cannot be granted to ‘invaders.’

“Hindus, a minority in nine states, were wiped out in Afghanistan. According to my understanding, this Constitution is not intended for foreign barbaric invade,” submitted Upadhyay, according to Bar and Bench.

Observations made by the Court while dismissing the petition

The bench stated that the principle of fraternity enshrined in our Constitution should take precedence over all other considerations.

“Any nation’s history cannot haunt its current and future generations to the point where succeeding generations become prisoners of the past. The golden principle of fraternity is of the utmost importance, and it has a rightful place in the Constitution’s Preamble. It implies that only harmony will bring the country together,” the Supreme Court bench said, as provided by LiveLaw.

The Court also stated that the petitioner is selectively re-examining the past and took issue with categorising an entire community as barbaric.

“You are selectively reexamining the past. India is now a secular country. Your finger is pointed at a certain barbaric community. Do you want to keep the country on boil? “Justice Joseph remarked, as reported in LiveLaw.

The Court, on the other hand, made it clear today that, while India has been invaded numerous times, this cannot be erased from history by renaming places.

“Can we rewrite history and say they did not invade?” Justice Joseph added. Invasion, according to Justice Nagarathan, is a fact of our history that cannot be bypassed. “Yes, foreign invaders have ruled us. We’ve been invaded several times, and history has played a role. What are you attempting to accomplish? Have we not got other problems in our country rather than wishing away for things which happened before?” Justice Nagarathan inquired.

Justice Joseph questioned the petitioner on what religious worship had to do with roads. He also highlighted the fact that Mughal Emperor Akbar’s goal was to create harmony among the various communities.

The bench remarked, prudently, that Hinduism is a great religion that does not tolerate bigotry.

“Because Hinduism is a way of life in India, it has assimilated everyone. As a result, we can live together. The British divide and rule policy caused a schism in our society. Let us not go back to that” Justice Nagarathna said as she expressed disapproval over the petition.

According to Justice Joseph, Hinduism has a rich tradition that should not be overlooked.

“Hinduism is the greatest religion in terms of metaphysics. The heights which Hinduism have in Upanishads, Vedas, Bhagavid Gita are unequal in any system. We should be proud of that. Please don’t belittle it. We have to understand our own greatness. Our greatness should lead us to be magnanimous. I am a Christian. But I am equally fond of Hinduism. I am trying to study it. You read the works of Dr S Radhakrishan on Hindu philosophy”, Justice Joseph said, as was reported by LiveLaw.

Justice Joseph further said that in Kerala, there are examples of Hindu rajas donating lands for churches. “That is the history of India. Please understand that“, Justice Joseph said.

Upadhyay replied that Hindus have been “wiped off from many historical places due to this kind of nature”.

In response to this, the bench said that “India that is Bharat is a secular country. A country cannot remain a prisoner of the past. India is wedded to rule of law, secularism, constitutionalism of which Article 14 stands out as the grand guarantee of both equality and fairness in State action. The founding fathers contemplated India to be a Republic which is not merely confined to having an elected President which is the conventional understanding but also involves all sections of people; it is a democracy. It is important that the country must move forward. It is indispensable for achieving the triple goals enshrined in the chapter of in DPSP bearing in mind the Fundamental Rights also…..Actions must be taken which infuse all sections of the society together.”

The bench also stated that the country must progress. It is necessary for achieving the objectives outlined in the Directive Principles chapter.

“Let us not break society with such petitions; please keep the country in mind, not any religion,” Justice Nagarathna advised the petitioner.

Decision of the Court

Sensing that the bench was unlikely to consider the matter for further hearings, Upadhyay requested permission to withdraw the petition and file a representation with the Ministry of Home Affairs. However, the bench stated that such a course will not be allowed.

The bench then dismissed the petition, emphasising the secular nature of the country and the Preambular idea of fraternity.

Who is Upadhyay? -a polarising lawyer with a saffron bent

All this is not new for advocate Ashwini Uphadhyay. In his career as a lawyer, Upadhyay has filed dozens of PILs in the Supreme Court, a majority of were with the aim of promoting and furthering the a majoritarianism; an ideology propagate by the BJP and its fountainhead RSS.

His PILs range from seeking a ban on “deceptive religious conversions”, making the National Anthem and Hindi a compulsory language in schools across the country, seeking expeditious disposal of criminal cases against politicians. In March 2021, the Supreme Court asked the government to file replies on the petitions that pertain to five aspects of civil laws—age of marriage, divorce, succession, maintenance and adoption. Advocate Ashwini Upadhyay had even filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking uniform age of marriage for men and women. While many of his PILs have been dismissed by the Supreme Court, with the Court referring to his petition on deceptive conversions as a Publicity Interest Litigation, a deeper look into them show how he has have laid the groundwork for larger Hindutva issues in the courts.

Before the Narendra Modi government repealed Article 370, which granted Jammu and Kashmir special status, in August 2019, Upadhyay had filed a PIL in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of the provision in September 2018 and set the ball rolling.

In recent times, more and more judges have recognised his patterns and his disguised attempts at targeting the Muslim community. The HC and SC judges have even rebuked him in court on filing frivolous petitions with the aim of seeking publicity or causing a stir between different segments co-existing in our democratic country. A few recent such instances are:

• In April 2021, a bench led by Justice Rohinton Faliman Nariman had heard a PIL filed by Ashwini Upadhya seeking to control black magic, superstition, and mass religious conversion of SC/STs through intimidation, threats, and gifts. Observing that the PIL was nothing more than a “publicity interest litigation” of a “harmful kind,” the bench warned the petitioner that if the matter was pursued, heavy costs would be imposed.

• In April 2022, the Supreme Court had declined to entertain Ashwini Upadhyay’s petition challenging the constitutionality of the Wakf Act, 1995. A Bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and Surya Kant observed that the constitutionality of a statute cannot be challenged in the “abstract” as a mere “academic exercise” when the petitioner has not demonstrated any violation of his rights as a result of the statute. The bench had explained to him that when the constitutional validity of a law is challenged, it can only be pursued on the basis of facts.

• In May 2022, the Delhi High Court, while issuing notice on a petition filed by Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay seeking a declaration that the song ‘Vande Mataram’ shall be honoured equally with the national anthem ‘Jana-Gana-Mana,’ expressed its displeasure for publicising the filing of the petition in the media. “This appears to be a publicity exercise. You have no business going to the press and informing them that you’ve filed this petition and that it will be heard soon… When a petitioner does something like this, the court gets the impression that it is just a publicity stunt “Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Sachin Datta told Upadhyay.

• In December 2022, while hearing arguments in a PIL filed by Ashwini Upadhyay alleging “mass conversions” across the country, the Supreme Court had taken exception of certain false and defamatory statements that had been made against minority religions by the petitioner.  The Court had even directed Senior Advocate Arvind P Datar, who was representing the petitioner, to ensure that such remarks were not recorded. This came after Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave, who was representing certain Christian organisations seeking to intervene in the case, told the bench of Justices MR Shah and S Ravindra Bhat that the petitioner had made extremely offensive allegations against other religions.Senior Advocate Dave had highlighted how the petitioner has implied that certain religions are perpetuating rapes and murders, are scandalous and baseless, and should not be on file. Taking note of this, the bench had asked the petitioner’s advocate to ensure that such allegations are removed from the record.

• In January 2023, the Supreme Court had commented critically on the conduct of BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay in filing different petitions before different benches of Supreme Court and the Delhi High Court on the same subject of religious conversions. Expressing his disappointment, CJI Chandrachud had told Upadhyay’s counsel, Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia that “It seems that PIL petitioners don’t think they’re bound by rules of pleadings….You cannot keep on withdrawing and filing new petitions”.

While a small percentage of his petitions have sought genuine reforms, labeling him a polarising figure with a communal agenda—to further the BJP’s agenda by filing “politically suitable and religiously contentious” PILs—will not be inaccurate. It is important to note that, while the aforementioned instances are limited to the courts, it is also about what he does outside of the courts. About a year ago, he was briefly detained by the Delhi Police for making an inflammatory speech during a protest at Jantar Mantar.

Recently, he had been invited to an “event” in Maharashtra, which had been organised by Bharat Raksha Manch, to speak on the issue of creating a nation that Chhtrapati Shivaji had dreamt of. In Maharashtra, this issue is being misused by many hate speakers to mislead the Maharashtrians deevotees into believing that their leader, Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, had dreamt of a Hindu nation, rid of all the Muslims. The poster for the said event is as follows:

In his speech, even though Upadhyay does not outrightly utter words that are targeted at the religious minorities in India, his intent is clear throughout the speech. He also made factually wrong and misinformed statements such as, “In India, in the year 2017, there were 5 crore Bangladeshi living here, spread across many states”, which makes his agenda of communally division ideology clear. He also quotes the example of exodus of Japanese from China, praising them, and then compares to the “movement” that has started in India.

The full video can be viewed here: 

While he is lauded at the function as the advocates behind the striking down of Triple Talaq, it is crucial for us to look at the bigger picture- had it not been better if a ban on Triple Talaq had not been criminalized? Thousands of Muslims, women and men have, since advocated the ban on triple talaq and polygamy in and out of the courts. Surely if cognizance of this had been taken by ‘secular’ governments earlier, such a law would not have been passed with a perspective that is clearly biased?  He has also filed plea seeking to declare the Constitution and Flag of the J&K invalid and void; directions to declare polygamy, Nikah-Halala, Nikah-Mutah, Nikah-Misyar and Sharia Court as invalid and void. While it is true that these customs may not pass constitutional muster in today’s world, isn’t it critical to ensure that change is brought about by ensuring that the demands within the Muslim community are met for reform rather than labeling this conveniently as an ‘us, progressive’ versus ‘them, regressive’ issue!

He has constantly targeted a minority community of India by filing serial PILs.  Now, the agenda of bringing in a Uniform Civil Code is on Upadhyay’s list. The question that arises is- will it be fair to ignore the communal agenda behind his actions while the Courts sit down to consider on the issue as fractious as the UCC? The issue of a gender just code involves focusing on gendered discrimination and not looking at the issue from a partisan majority-minority lense!

Related:

Jantar Mantar rally: BJP leader, SC lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay among six arrested

Uniform laws on marriage, divorce issue for Parliament to decide: Supreme Court

Anti-Conversion Laws: The trope of forced religious conversions

Remove scurrilous remarks against minority religions, SC tells Ashwini Upadhay: petition against ‘mass coversions’

It’s Welfare & Social Justice under the Indian Constitution, not “freebies”

The post SC calls out Ashwini Upadhyay on his repeated attempts to target Muslim Community appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Days after a rally they organised, turned into a hate speech generator, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Ashwini Upadhyay and five others have been arrested by the Delhi Police. As per the police, case under sections 153A ( Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, etc) and 188 of the Indian Penal Code (disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant, in this case it is likely to refer to Covid related restriction still in place in public spaces) has been filed against the accused.

The other men arrested have been identified as: Deepak Singh, who is said to be president of an outfit called Hindu Force, Vinod Sharma who heads an outfit called Sudarshan Vahini, Vineet Kranti and Preet Singh. According to Indian Express, they were previously detained and by afternoon on Tuesday August 10, they were formally arrested. The arrest, according to IE, has been confirmed by JCP (New Delhi Range) Jaspal Singh.

The men have been accused of being involved in the communal sloganeering that called for violence against Muslims, at the rally called by Upadhyay near Jantar Mantar on Sunday. According to media reports, Ashwini Upadhyay had been asked to report to the Connaught Place police station for questioning on Monday. They were eventually detained, and finally arrested. There has been a massive public outrage at the hate speech calling for Muslim genocide being allowed at the rally which was attended by many who openly aligned themselves with Hindutva groups, and raised communal slogans. The groups, high on hate, did not even spare journalist  Anmol Pritam, who was at Jantar Mantar on Sunday reporting for the online news portal National Dastak. he shared how he was surrounded by a Hindutva mob that was forcing him to chant “Jai Shri Ram”, a religious slogan they have morphed into war cry. He refused.

मुझसे डरा धमकाकर “जय श्री राम”बुलवाने की कोशिश की गई. जब मैंने मना किया तो मेरे साथ धक्का मुक्की भी किया गया. आप लोग वीडियो में खुद ही देख लीजिए@NationalDastak @Profdilipmandal pic.twitter.com/iswtGbff72

— Reporter Anmol Pritam (@anmolpritamND) August 8, 2021

Two days later, the arrest of Ashwini Upadhyay who was once a spokesperson for the state unit of BJP, is more likely to be used by him to promote himself as a ‘nationalist’ leader. He  had given the call for Sunday’s rally on various social media channels along with  ex-journalist Pushpendra Kulshreshtha asking people to gather on the streets in large numbers as other right-wing influencers. He had promised that other right wing influencers such as politician Kapil Mishra and army veteran Lt Gen (retd) GD Bakshi will also be there. However, on Sunday, August 8, he had to contend with former TV actor Gajendra Singh Chauhan, as the ‘star attraction’. Upadhyay however, made sure he himself remained in the spotlight as hundreds of protesters, some who had brought along their children, let the hate speech fly free, while the rally ‘officially’ demanded that “222 black laws… made by the English” be removed from the Indian Penal Code. The crowds perhaps assumed that Upadhyay as a lawyer, is an authority on the IPC. Seven years ago, he was expelled from the Aam Aadmi party, and as expected he has an affinity towards political colleague Kapil Mishra and fans of the latter also lend their support.

Even before this hate rally threw him into the limelight once again, Upadhyay has featured in scores of videos, often along with Pushpendra Kulshrestra where they ‘discuss’ the right wing agenda. Their video discussions often get lakhs  of views. 

((Source: Youtube screengrab))

However, it was ironic that Kulshrestra stayed safe and away from the rally of August 8, he even shared the police post that the rally did not have any official permission. 

No permission has been given by Police for this program on 8th August. Delhi Disaster Management Authority’s order dated 24.07.2021 prohibits social/religious/cultural/political etc. gathering throughout NCT.

— DCP New Delhi (@DCPNewDelhi) August 7, 2021

The other right wing influencers too stayed away. Instead, in attendance were the rabib violence inducing groups who then proceeded to chant hate slogans while being filmed. While on the face it it looks as if Upadhyay’s influential friends have thrown him to the wolves, the fact remains that there are many supporete speaking up for him. A video uploaded on Youtube uploaded some time ago, is lamenting why Upadhyay was arrested when the Delhi Police was under the Home Ministry. The video by one Sandeep Deo is gaining viewers as he makes an appeal for Upadhyay, painting him as a patriotic leader. 

Is Upadhyay’s Bharat Jodo andolan twisting a call given by the PM in July? 

The Bharat Jodo Andolan rally, which soon became an incubator of calls for violence and massacre againt the Muslim community with slurs like “Jab M***e Kate Jaenge Ram Ram chillayenge” has a name similar to the slogan. It was in July this year, that Prime Minister Narendra Modi asked people to lead a ‘Bharat jodo andolan’ (unite India movement). According to an Indian Express report from then, the PM in his ‘Mann ki Baat’ radio address, had said “Just the way the Quit India Movement, (Bharat Chhorro Andolan) was steered under Bapu’s leadership, every countryman today has to lead a ‘Bharat Jodo Andolan’. It is our duty to ensure that our work helps closely knit, bind our India which is filled with diversity… we have to move forward with the mantra ‘nation first, always first’”.

Upadhyay’s supporters at the rally have now taken the PM’s slogan to a direction that suits their divisive and violent agenda. Meanwhile, there is no word from the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), yet on what action they would take against Upadhyay, a member arranging such a rally, and subsequently being arrested after it took a communal turn. Upadhyay on his part had been active on social media, before his arrest, positioning himself as a martyr of sorts with words like: “whether i am around or not…  English laws should be abolished…”

मैं रहूँ या न रहूँ

अंग्रेजी कानून खत्म होना चाहिए तथा

समान शिक्षा, समान चिकित्सा, समान कर संहिता, समान दंड संहिता, समान श्रम संहिता, समान पुलिस संहिता, समान न्यायिक संहिता, समान नागरिक संहिता, समान धर्मस्थल संहिता और समान जनसंख्या संहिता लागू होना चाहिए@narendramodi @AmitShah

— Ashwini Upadhyay (@AshwiniUpadhyay) August 9, 2021

Related:

Anti-Muslim hate speech at Delhi rally calls for communal violence
Haj House in Dwarka will lead to riots: Residents Federation write to Lt-Governor
FIR against serial hate offender Ragini Tiwari, finally
Yati Narsinghanand continues to spread hate
Gurugram Court denies bail to ‘Jamia Shooter’ in a Hate Speech case

The post Jantar Mantar rally: BJP leader, SC lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay among six arrested appeared first on SabrangIndia.