The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a plea seeking cancellation of the registration of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) as a political party, noting that the party’s objectives align with constitutional values. The bench also issued a broader caution against political mobilisation based on caste and religion, calling such trends “equally dangerous for the country.”
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi made these observations while hearing a petition filed by Tirupati Narasimha Murari, represented by advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, challenging the recognition granted to AIMIM by the Election Commission (EC). The petition sought to revoke AIMIM’s status on grounds that it allegedly promoted religious teachings and Sharia law.
However, the court rejected the argument, observing that the AIMIM’s constitution explicitly states its intention to work for backward and minority communities — a principle supported by the Indian Constitution.
“The party says they will work for every backward class in the society, including Muslims who are backward both economically and in the field of education. This is what our Constitution professes,” Justice Surya Kant remarked.
Responding to the petitioner’s claim that AIMIM promotes Islamic education and Sharia law, the bench maintained there was nothing unconstitutional in that. “Teaching Islamic education is not wrong. We will welcome if more and more political parties establish educational institutions in the country,” the court observed.
Jain also argued that registering a political party with a Hindu name and stating an intention to teach scriptures like the Vedas and Puranas would face opposition from the Election Commission. The court responded firmly: “If the ECI raises any such objection, please go to the appropriate forum. There is no prohibition under the law against the reading or teaching of our old treatise, books or literature.”
The court also underlined a key distinction: “If a political party says it will promote untouchability, that is absolutely offending and must be struck down and banned. But if a party wants to teach religious law protected under the Constitution, it is within the constitutional framework and not objectionable.”
While declining to entertain the plea against AIMIM, the court allowed the petitioner to withdraw and file a broader, neutral writ seeking reforms in the regulation of political parties. “There are grey areas. Some parties may indulge in religious or caste-based campaigning despite legal undertakings. But one cannot single out a party — a neutral petition raising general issues would be more appropriate,” the bench suggested.
On January 16, the Delhi High Court had already dismissed a similar challenge to AIMIM’s registration, holding that the party had complied with all statutory requirements and was entitled to advocate its beliefs and values under the Constitution. The division bench had upheld the November 2023 decision of a single judge, which found the plea devoid of merit and an infringement of the AIMIM’s fundamental rights.
