Professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad of Ashoka University was arrested by Haryana Police over a social media post related to "Operation Sindoor." In the post, he praised officers like Colonel Sophia Qureshi and Wing Commander Vyomika Singh but also expressed concern over mob lynching and communal tensions.

Haryana Police and the State Women’s Commission deemed the post a threat to national security and alleged that it could incite social unrest. Mahmudabad was charged under serious sections of the Indian Penal Code. Although the Supreme Court granted him interim bail, it imposed strict conditions, including the submission of his passport.

The Larger Debate: Free Speech vs National Security

This incident has sparked a broader debate on the balance between freedom of expression, academic liberty, and national security. One side argues that caution is necessary during sensitive times, while the other sees the arrest as an attack on freedom of speech and academic independence.

The issue was discussed on BBC Hindi’s weekly program The Lens, hosted by Mukesh Sharma, Director of Journalism at Collective Newsroom. Panelists included senior advocate and legal writer Virag Gupta, former Delhi University Dean Professor Anita Rampal, and BBC’s legal affairs correspondent Umang Poddar.

Was It a Targeted Move?

On May 8, Professor Mahmudabad posted about Colonel Sophia Qureshi and Wing Commander Vyomika Singh participating in a press briefing. He also commented on the India-Pakistan conflict and questioned the calls for war. The Haryana State Women’s Commission issued a notice to him on May 12, and he was arrested on May 18.

Professor Anita Rampal argued that the post was not offensive or threatening. She suggested that the arrest appeared orchestrated to appease political powers. “Neither students nor faculty found anything objectionable in his post. The response from authorities seems like part of a larger plan,” she said.

Immediate Arrest and Police Action

Umang Poddar noted that political speech or statements critical of the government often prompt swift police action, as seen in this case. Two FIRs were filed against Mahmudabad, citing threats to national integrity and promoting enmity between communities, among other serious charges.

Virag Gupta questioned the legality of the arrest, noting that under Section 41 of the CrPC, police are required to issue a notice before arrest in cases involving punishment of less than seven years. No such notice was served in this instance.

Supreme Court’s Interim Bail Order Under Fire

The Supreme Court’s decision to grant interim bail came with controversial remarks and conditions. These included seizing the professor's passport and advising him not to comment on Pahalgam or India-Pakistan relations in the future.

Critics questioned why the Supreme Court needed a Special Investigation Team (SIT) of senior police officers to interpret a post written in academic language. Poddar highlighted that the court labeled the post possibly as "dog-whistling" or a "cheap publicity stunt," even though it couldn’t immediately identify anything objectionable in it.

Selective Justice? Comparison with Minister Vijay Shah

In contrast, Madhya Pradesh Minister Vijay Shah made controversial remarks about Colonel Sophia Qureshi on May 12, which sparked public outrage but did not lead to immediate police action. Only after High Court intervention was an FIR registered, which the court later criticized as weak.

Virag Gupta noted this disparity: “In Mahmudabad’s case, police acted swiftly, while Vijay Shah’s case saw delays and a watered-down FIR. This reflects the breakdown of the legal system and the close ties between politicians and law enforcement.”

Is the Law Applied Equally?

Gupta argued that the Indian legal system is being misused and has become performative. He criticized the need to approach the Supreme Court for basic bail and pointed out that only cases with senior advocates seem to get fast-tracked.

He added, “If 60 crore Indians use social media and 20 crore post offensive or questionable content daily, are we going to file sedition charges against all of them? Can our system handle that?”

Religious Bias Alleged in Arrest

Professor Anita Rampal suggested that Mahmudabad’s arrest may have been influenced by his religious identity. She referenced a similar case involving academic Samina Dalwai, where the Women’s Commission accused her of violating modesty norms despite the discussion being purely academic.

She criticized Ashoka University’s stance as well, calling it “bizarre and disappointing.” According to her, by saying the university would cooperate with the investigation, they indirectly assumed guilt.