The Allahabad High Court has categorically declared that the slogan “gustakh-e-nabi ki ek saja, sar tan se juda” is not protected speech, not religious expression, and not dissent, but a direct assault on India’s Constitution, legal system, and sovereignty.
Rejecting the bail plea of Rihan, an accused in the Bareilly violence linked to the “I Love Muhammad” controversy, the court held that raising such slogans amounts to challenging the authority of the Indian State and inciting armed rebellion.
The order, passed on December 17, by Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, runs into detailed constitutional, legal, historical and ideological analysis, making it one of the strongest judicial indictments of Islamist mob radicalism in recent years.
Rihan, arrested during large-scale violence in Bareilly, had sought bail claiming false implication, lack of criminal history, and alleged arrest from his home. His counsel argued that there was no incriminating material linking him to violence.
The State of Uttar Pradesh, represented by Additional Advocate General Anoop Trivedi, firmly opposed the plea, asserting that Rihan was part of an unlawful assembly that:
- Openly defied prohibitory orders
- Raised genocidal slogans calling for beheading
- Attacked police personnel
- Damaged public and private property
- The High Court rejected the defence outright.
“There is sufficient material in the case diary showing that the applicant was part of an unlawful assembly which not only raised objectionable slogans challenging the authority of the Indian legal system but also caused injuries to police personnel,” the court observed.
Calling the acts “nothing but an offence against the State,” the court refused to grant bail. A central pillar of the judgement is the court’s firm rejection of the ideological premise behind the slogan.
Justice Deshwal meticulously explained that Indian criminal law already addresses religious insult, but explicitly rejects vigilante justice.
Referring to the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the court highlighted:
- Sections 298, 299 and 302 BNS: Punish deliberate acts intended to outrage religious feelings
- Section 152 BNS: Penalises acts threatening sovereignty, unity and integrity of India
“There is no such punishment provided in Indian law which permits beheading a person for disrespecting any God, Prophet or religious figure,” the court stated.
The slogan, the court held, shows disdain for the Indian legal system and replaces rule of law with mob-enforced religious terror. The judgement draws a sharp constitutional line between legitimate expression and criminal incitement.
While acknowledging Article 19 guarantees freedom of speech and assembly, the court underlined that Article 19(2) explicitly restricts speech that threatens:
- Public order
- Morality
- Sovereignty and integrity of India
“Any slogan that calls for murder, contrary to punishments prescribed under law, directly challenges the legitimacy of the Indian legal system and is punishable,” the order said.
To remove any ambiguity, the judge contrasted the extremist slogan with religious chants from different faiths—“Jai Shri Ram,” “Har Har Mahadev,” “Jo Bole So Nihal,” “Allahu Akbar” noting that devotional slogans are lawful unless weaponised to intimidate or incite violence.
The phrase “sar tan se juda”, however, explicitly calls for killing, placing it outside constitutional protection.
In a striking observation, the High Court traced the slogan’s origins to Pakistan’s extremist ecosystem, exposing it as an imported ideology rather than a religious doctrine.
The court recorded that:
- The slogan does not appear in the Quran or any Islamic scripture
- It was popularised by Khadim Hussain Rizvi, founder of Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP)
- It emerged prominently after the Asia Bibi blasphemy case
- The assassination of Punjab Governor Salman Taseer further radicalised its use
“This slogan spread to other countries including India and has been widely misused to intimidate people of other religions and challenge the authority of the State,” the court noted.
The judge warned that its use in India amounts to importing Pakistan-style blasphemy vigilantism, which is fundamentally incompatible with India’s constitutional order.
The case stems from violent unrest triggered after Maulana Taukir Raza Khan, head of the Ittefaq Minnat Council, allegedly called for a mass mobilisation.
Despite prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS):
- Around 500 people gathered in Biharipur
- Slogans against the State and “sar tan se juda” were raised
- Police were assaulted; batons snatched; uniforms torn
- Stones, petrol bombs and even gunfire were used
- Several policemen were injured; vehicles destroyed
Seven accused, including Rihan, were arrested on the spot. An FIR was registered against 25 named and 1700 unknown individuals, with arrests based on CCTV footage, witness testimony and confessions.
Perhaps the most consequential finding of the judgement is its classification of the slogan as incitement to armed rebellion. “Raising such a slogan challenges the authority of law, sovereignty and integrity of India and encourages people to take the law into their own hands,” the court held.
By invoking Section 152 BNS, the court effectively placed such slogans in the category of anti-national criminal conduct, not mere hate speech.
The High Court also acknowledged the deadly consequences associated with the slogan, referencing how similar ideological motivations have led to:
- The beheading of Kanhaiya Lal in Udaipur
- The brutal murder of Kamlesh Tiwari
- Repeated death threats against individuals accused of blasphemy
The judgement recognised that the slogan places an implicit death sentence on anyone branded a “blasphemer,” regardless of truth or law.
