Charges against Ali Khan Mahmudabad will not be framed yet as the Supreme Court halts trial proceedings, granting temporary relief.
The Supreme Court has granted significant relief to Ashoka University professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad, staying trial court proceedings and prohibiting the framing of charges until the next hearing. The case stems from his social media post discussing the government’s choice of Colonel Sofiya Qureshi and Wing Commander Vyomika Singh for Operation Sindoor briefings.
Updates from the Court Proceedings
- The Special Investigation Team (SIT) informed the bench that it submitted a closure report in one of the two cases filed against Mr. Mahmudabad.
- The bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, explicitly directed that no charges be framed against the professor until further notice from the top court.
Bail Terms Relaxed
Earlier, after his arrest on May 18, the Supreme Court had granted bail with several restrictions:
- He could not post articles, make online comments, or deliver speeches related to the case.
- He was required to avoid commenting on the Pahalgam attack or Operation Sindoor.
- His passport had to be surrendered.
Subsequently, the court relaxed these stringent conditions, allowing Mr. Mahmudabad to:
- Write posts and articles, and express opinions, as long as they don’t pertain to the sub judice case.
Charges in the Case
Currently, he faces charges under the following sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS):
- Section 152 – Acts endangering sovereignty or integrity of India
- Section 353 – Statements causing public mischief
- Section 79 – Deliberate insult to the modesty of a woman
- Section 196(1) – Promoting enmity between religious groups
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Mr. Mahmudabad, expressed regret over the invocation of Section 152, describing it as “unfortunate.”
What This Means
- No charges can be formally framed until the Supreme Court issues further directions.
- Mahmudabad now has greater freedom to articulate views—excluding commentary on the ongoing case.
- The SIT’s closure report in one case could significantly affect the proceedings.
This ruling offers crucial breathing space and procedural leeway to the professor. It underscores the Supreme Court’s role in safeguarding fair trial rights and ensuring that laws—particularly those concerning free speech—are not applied in haste or injustice.
