The Allahabad High Court has refused to grant bail to a 62-year-old man accused of sharing a Facebook post that allegedly propagated anti-national sentiments, including the slogan “Pakistan Zindabad” and an appeal for “jihad” in support of Pakistani nationals.
Justice Siddhartha, while rejecting the bail plea of accused Ansar Ahmed Siddique, remarked that courts displaying tolerance towards such anti-national expressions have contributed to their growing frequency. “The commission of such offences is becoming a routine affair in this country because the courts are liberal and tolerant towards such acts of people with an anti-national bent of mind,” the judge observed. “It is not a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail at this stage.”
The court strongly criticised the act of sharing such content, calling it “disrespectful to the Constitution and its ideals” and one that “adversely affects the unity and integrity of India.” Emphasising the constitutional duties of citizens, the bench invoked Article 51A(a) and (c) of the Constitution, which require individuals to respect national symbols and uphold the nation’s sovereignty and unity.
“The applicant is a senior citizen and his age shows that he was born in independent India. His irresponsible and anti-national conduct does not entitle him to seek protection of his right to liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution,” the judge added.
According to the FIR lodged at Chhatari Police Station in Bulandshahr district, Siddique had shared a video on Facebook on May 3, which contained slogans such as “Pakistan Zindabad” and calls for jihad, allegedly appealing to Muslims to support “Pakistani brothers.” The post was reportedly shared shortly after the April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam, which claimed 26 lives.
The accused faces charges under sections 152 (acts endangering sovereignty, unity and integrity of India) and 197 (acts that undermine national integration) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
During the bail hearing, Siddique’s counsel argued that the accused had merely shared a video and was not its creator, stressing that he is an elderly man under medical treatment. However, the state counsel contended that the post reflected support for terrorist activities and posed a threat to national integrity.
While declining bail, the court directed that the trial be conducted and concluded at the earliest.
