Audacious Maulana repeats threat to kill those who left Islam,' HC rejects his Anticipatory bail [Read Order]

In a sensational case, a Muslim scholar issued a threat that it is just to kill those who were born Muslim and left Islam. But he had "audacity" to repeat this on oath before the Allahabad High Court, which now has rejected his plea for anticipatory bail in an FIR lodged by Jitendra Narayan Singh Tyagi formerly known as Waseem Rizvi, by terming his conduct as "extremely disturbing".

A bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi said applicant Maulana Syed Mohammad Shabibul Husaini by his conduct does not deserve exercise of discretion of this court in his favour for grant of pre-arrest bail.

"The applicant has stated in his interview that it is just to murder persons who were Muslims since birth and have changed their religion and he has the audacity to reiterate his stand on oath even before this Court. The conduct of the applicant is prejudicial to public order and it certainly is extremely disturbing," the bench said.

It further noted applicant is charged with commission of offences of abetment of murder, promoting enmity on the ground of religion and making assertions prejudicial to national integration, besides some other offences.

"These offences are of a very serious nature. The material relied by the prosecution is the applicant’s interview available on You Tube and the applicant has reiterated is stand even in his affidavit filed before this Court," the bench said.

According to the FIR lodged on March 18, 2023 by Jitendra Narayan Singh, the applicant on INN Channel on YouTube, stated that the informant’s “Katl Wajib Hai” (it is desirable to kill). The applicant has made a reference to the Fatwa issued against the author Salman Rushdie. It has further been stated in the FIR. that since the informant changed his religion and accepted 'Sanatan Dharm', he is repeatedly getting threats to life and after the  video was uploaded on YouTube, he is being threatened again. The informant has further stated that the statement of the applicant is spreading hatred in the society at large.

In his application, Husaini contended that he is a scholar and spiritual person of Shia community  of Muslims and he is engaged in imparting religious sermons and he has authored several books. He also said he has never involved himself in any political activities and he is only concerned with academics; that the interview in question was taken when the applicant was returning after finishing some academic activities at New Delhi and he had replied to certain questions asked by a journalist regarding Tyagi “in light of the provisions / sermon of Holy Quran and Islamic jurisprudence”.

It has further been stated in the affidavit that the applicant had not issued a fatwa and he has no authority to do so and whatever he stated in the interview, was stated “in the light of Shia school of thought, philosophy and jurisprudence”.

The affidavit further claimed that the applicant has no criminal history.

In transcript of his interview, he stated, "The punishment for 'Murtade Fitri' is only and only murder and no one has the right to forgive him. A Murtade Fitri who has rebelled against Islam, his parents were Muslims or he himself was a Muslim, he was a Muslim by birth and he has adopted the Kuffr, now it would be just to commit his murder."

In his application, Husaini reinforced his stand before the court that since he (Wasim Rizvi) was a Muslim and he adopted the Kufr, his murder is justified.

"What is even more disturbing than the utterances made by the applicant in his interview is that in the affidavit filed in support of the application for anticipatory bail, the applicant has justified his statements and has stated on oath that ‘he had given the statement according to Islamic Jurisprudence (Shia-Jafri) based on many books, wherein it is written that according to Jafri or Imami school, the Male apostates must be executed, while female apostates must be held in solitary confinement until they repents and return to Islam," the court said.

In support of his assertion, he has cited the books – “Islam’s Trajectory Archived” by David F Forte (2011), “Citizenship in the Arab World” by Parolin, Gianluca P (2009) and “Crime and Punishment in Islamic Law” by Peters, Rudolph (2005).

The court said, that the applicant claims himself to be an Islamic religious scholar and he has claimed that he had made the statements “in light of the provisions / sermon of Holy Quran and Islamic jurisprudence” and “in the light of Shia school of thought, philosophy and jurisprudence” but he has not referred to a single verse of the Holy Quran.

"Article 25 of the Constitution of India confers the Fundamental Right to freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion by providing that all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practice and propagate religion, but this right is subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of Part III of the Constitution," the court said.

"The applicant does not have the right to propagate his religion in a manner which may result in an adverse effect to pubic order and he cannot propagate his religion in a manner which may be prejudicial to the health and well-being of the informant," the court added.

[Read Order]