Mohd Zubair's 'X' Posts With Half-Baked Info Threatened India's Sovereignty, Promoted 'Feeling Of Separatist Activity': UP Govt To Allahabad HC

Additional Advocate General Manish Goyal submitted before a bench of Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Nalin Kumar Srivastava that Zubair's X post, which intended to provoke violence against Yati Narsinghanand, also promoted a 'feeling separatist activity'.

He further argued that the post was selective, aiming to paralyze the official police machinery performing its duties, encouraging people to take the law into their own hands.

AAG Goyal also submitted that, as a fact-checker, he knew that action had already been taken against Yati Narsinghanand for his alleged speech. However, Zubair continued posting on Twitter despite this, claiming that no action had been taken against him.

“Even on 4^th October, he (Zubair) could have clarified saying police has booked Yati Narsinghanand, he was arrested and granted bail yet he is repeating that no action was taken against him, all separatist tendencies.. he is sitting and reposting…These posts were calculated posts on social media where he had a fan following.. in the capacity of the social media influencer.. he exercised his influence over peoplewho live in UP,” AAG Goel submitted.

Here, it may be noted that Zubair is facing an FIR, inter alia, under Section 152 BNS, based on a complaint by Udita Tyagi, general secretary of the Yati Narsinghanand Saraswati Trust.

Zubair had posted a thread of videos on October 3. The first tweet contained a video showing Yati Narsinghanand, the priest of Dasna Devi Temple, making inflammatory remarks about Prophet Muhammad. He also tagged UP police, asking what actions had been taken against Yati.

The complainant alleged that the old video clips were shared with the intent of inciting violence by Muslims. Zubair was also blamed for the violent protests against Yati Narsinghanand at Dasna Devi Mandi. Challenging the FIR, Zubair has moved the HC.

Before the Court, his counsels contended that Zubair was simply exercising his freedom of speech by referring to the alleged speech of Yati Narsinghanand and highlighting his conduct.

The Counsel further stated that not just Zubair but many new articles and social media accounts had posted about the same issue, and Zubair had not said anything different. The senior counsel also argued that the complaint by Dr. Tyagi was merely a publicity stunt.

It was also argued that when the X post was made, there was no prohibition order from the police or any other administrative authority to stop tweeting about #Yati Narsinghanand's speech.

During the course of the hearing, the division bench queried the defence several times as to how Section 152 BNS and its ingredients are attracted in the case. The court also asked what amounts to feeling to separate or separatist activity?

“...we are considering whether he has excited or attempted to excite, secession or armed rebellion or subversive activities, or encouraged feelings of separatist activities or endangered sovereignty or unity and integrity of India,” Justice Varma remarked.

In response to this, AAG Goyal submitted that, as Zubair claimed, he is a globally renowned fact checker. Thus, he was supposed to know that Yati was facing over 20 FIRs, yet he said the police were not taking action against him.

“He is lying. He was cognizant of the fact that 4 of Yati's aids had been arrested, yet he continued to tweet that the police were not taking action….What is the point of posting a year-old video on the 3rd or 4th of October, 2024? His post is selective, ignoring the fact that the police had already taken action, and that the court granted bail to Yati. Is this what he considers fact-checking?” : AAG Goyal submitted.

AAG Goyal also submitted that Zubair was cognizant that the 4th of October was a Friday, and there would be a congregation, so he put out a post at that time. He added that the FIR shows his conduct, which has caused so much damage and created a threat to the sovereignty and integrity of the country.

AAG Goyal added that Zubair did not clarify that Yati Narsinghanand was arrested, sent to jail, and then given bail. Without any clarification, he continued to repost, he said.

“It is kind of a separatist movement. This is a very harsh post on the part of the fact-checker. He says FIR (against Yati) is filed under weak sections and forgotten. Here, the police are filing a chargesheet. Suppose I believe in my friend that whatever he has briefed me on is correct; I make a statement before your Lordship. It has very serious consequences….Feeling separatist activity means that a particular sect of society feels insecure because of actions of other sections and the sect is made to believe that the the other section is being given the protection by goverment so they can go scott free. So here it is a feeling of separatist activity and not actual separatist activity,” AAG Goel submitted.

It was contended that by tagging the Union Minority Ministry and UP police, the petitioner was trying to show that the police machinery was not coming to help him, and thus, he incited the public.