The Centre raised significant legal questions at the Supreme Court on Wednesday regarding the plea by controversial Islamic preacher Zakir Naik, who is seeking the consolidation of multiple FIRs lodged against him in different states. These FIRs pertain to his alleged inflammatory statements during the 2012 Ganapati festival. Represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, the government questioned the admissibility of Naik’s petition, given his status as a fugitive.
During the hearing before a bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, and Augustine George Masih, Mehta inquired about the constitutional basis under which a fugitive could file a plea under Article 32 of the Constitution. “I was told by his advocate that they are withdrawing the matter. Our counter was ready,” Mehta disclosed in court.
The counsel for Naik countered that there had been no instructions to withdraw and highlighted that the plea involved approximately 43 cases registered across various states, with six FIRs pending direct resolution. Naik’s legal team announced plans to approach the high court to seek quashing of these FIRs.
In response to these submissions, the Supreme Court directed Naik’s counsel to submit an affidavit clarifying their intent to either pursue or withdraw the case. The court also instructed Mehta to file a formal response, setting the stage for further proceedings scheduled for October 23.
Naik, who has been living abroad since fleeing India in 2016 following the Dhaka cafe bombing, is also under investigation by the National Investigation Agency for alleged involvement in terror activities. The Dhaka attack, which resulted in over 20 fatalities, was reportedly inspired by Naik’s teachings, according to one of the attackers. Additionally, some recruits of the Islamic State have claimed that their allegiance to the terror group was influenced by Naik’s rhetoric.
