Supreme Court Directs UP Police Officer Accused Of Anti-Muslim Remarks To Give Voice Sample; Quashes Case Against Man Who Flagged Audio

The Supreme Court today(December 8) quashed a criminal case against a man in Uttar Pradesh on finding that it was falsely lodged against him after he was proposing to initiate legal action over an audio clip in which the then Superintendent of Police, Bijnor, was allegedly heard making objectionable comments against Muslims.The bench comprising Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice K Vinod Chandran impleaded the DIG Sanjeev Tyagi(then SP Bijnor) as a party and directed him to give his voice sample to the State FSL Laboratory, Telangana, along with the alleged audio clip for verification. The case arose during the COVID-19 pandemic. As per the petitioner, Islamuddin Ansari, in March 2020, he had forwarded an audio clip of the then SP Bijnor to the SP himself to confirm if he was the speaker of the derogatory language used against the Muslim community. Following that, an FIR was registered against the petitioner for allegedly spreading rumours with the intent to incite feelings of enmity against the Muslim community under Section 505 IPC and Section 67 IT Act. A chargesheet was filed in the FIR of which cognisance was taken by the Chief Judicial Magistrate in 2021. After the Allahabad High Court refused to quash the case against the petitioner, he approached the Supreme Court.Last Friday, the Supreme Court expressed grave concern about the matter and put sharp questions at the State. Following that, today, the Counsel for the State of Uttar Pradesh informed the bench that the State has filed a petition before the Court concerned seeking withdrawal of the case against the petitioner. The Counsel added that he does not want to make submissions on what has happened in the case.However, Justice Amanullah questioned how the case was maintainable at the first instance. He remarked that the lodging of the FIR was an abuse of the authority of law. He also asked why no verification of the audio was done."If you have said those things, you will have to be responsible to the system. We asked you to take instructions and that is why we did not implead him. We had asked you and the IO has never called you! Your voice has gone viral, you will not give a voice sample?," Justice Amanullah remarked.Accordingly, the Court passed an order for quashing the FIR registered at the police station Kotwali Shahar, Bijnor: "Having regard to the aforesaid, we find it to be totally an abuse of their authority and also the process of the Court by the Police in initiating the proceedings. Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.6196 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime No.0171 of 2020, P.S. Kotwali Shahar, District Bijnor stand quashed."As for the verification of the audio, Justice Amanullah remarked that no reply was offered to the petitioner when he had asked if the voice purported to be was of the then SP Bijnor. Stating that the petitioner had rightly asked for the then SP, the Court observed:"However, we are more concerned with the background in which such a situation arose. The petitioner having asked the Superintendent of Police and rightly so, before making a formal complaint, as to whether, the voice purported to be his, disclosing that he had used some very objectionable language was, never replied to, we direct that the voice sample of the then Superintendence of Police- Mr. Sanjeev Tyagi, who has been promoted and currently posted at DIG, Basti Range, Uttar Pradesh, for being confirmed with the clip which was forwarded to him, by the petitioner, be sent for examination. The said FSL examination would be done at the State FSL Laboratory, in the State of Telangana, Hyderabad."The Court has also impleaded Telangana Forensic Sciences Laboratories, through its Director, as Respondent 3. "The Director shall get the examination done under his direct supervision. He shall be personally responsible for ensuring that the test is done by competent persons of proven, integrity and the exercise is uninfluenced by any person/authority/extraneous consideration. The Director shall submit the report to this Court in a sealed cover latest by 31st of January, 2026." It added that if any attempt is made by authorities to harass or exert pressure on the petitioner, he is at liberty to move an appropriate application in the present case itself. The matter will now be heard on January 12, 3:30 pm.Case Details: ISLAMUDDIN ANSARI Vs STATE OF U.P.|SLP(Crl) No. 14997/2025Click Here To Read OrderAppearances: For Petitioner(s) Mr. Aadil Singh Boparai, Adv. Mr. Abhishek Dubey, Adv. Ms. Prakruthi Jain, Adv. Mrs. Shurti Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Amarjeet Singh, AOR Mr. Satvinder Singh, Adv.For Respondent(s) Mr. Abhishek Saket, Adv. Mr. Sudeep Kumar, AOR Ms. Manisha, Adv. Ms. Rupali, Adv. Ms. Nidhi Singh, Adv.

Supreme Court Directs UP Police Officer Accused Of Anti-Muslim Remarks To Give Voice Sample; Quashes Case Against Man Who Flagged Audio

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

Tags