'Anti-National Ideology': Allahabad High Court Denies Bail To Man Over Alleged FB Posts Ridiculing PM Modi, Glorifying Pakistan

A bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh observed that the alleged posts appeared to 'ridicule' Indian leadership and promote a narrative contrary to the interest of national sovereignty, unity and integrity.

The accused (Tahir Mewati) was booked under Sections 152, 352, 197(1)(c), and 353(1)(C) BNS for allegedly posting on objectionable visuals on Facebook such as depictions of Prime Minister Narendra Modi touching the feet of Imran Khan, being tied with a rope and dragged by Imran Khan and captions like “Modi Maafi Maangta Hai” along with Urdu texts allegedly glorifying Pakistan.

Taking note of the allegations against him, the bench said that the alleged posts were provocative, objectionable and capable of inciting communal disharmony and disturbing public peace and order.

"The themes and language used in the post indicate inclination towards glorification of anti-national ideology, which cannot be ignored", the Court further added.

The accused moved the HC after the Sessions Court rejected his bail plea. His counsel contended that an unknown person was operating a fake Facebook ID in his name with the intention of maligning his image.

It was also claimed that the accused had neither posted anything on social media nor made any video viral against the Prime Minister, and that he had no criminal history.

The AGA, on the other hand, opposed the bail plea by pointing out that the applicant had taken contradictory stands before the Sessions Court and the High Court.

Essentially, before the Sessions Court, he had argued that he uploaded only certain 'memes' and not any objectionable content intended to disturb public peace.

However, before the High Court, he had completely denied the claim of posting any content.

The AGA further argued that the applicant had posted objectionable and inflammatory videos on the social media platform Facebook, which were clearly intended to glorify violent extremism and promote anti-national sentiments.

It was submitted that the applicant posed a threat to the country's sovereignty and unity and that there were incriminating circumstances against him.

Against the backdrop of these submissions, the bench denied him bail.