New Delhi: “I’m actually confused as to how many FIRs there are now. I think 11 or 12.”
Mohammed Zubair, 42, a fact checker and father of three children, was trying to recall how many criminal cases have been registered against him over the past three years, mostly by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government in Uttar Pradesh (UP).
Close to two months after they registered the latest case in the western district of Ghaziabad, the UP police on 26 November informed the Allahabad High Court they had added section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 to the first information report (FIR)—“act endangering unity, sovereignty and integrity of India”, which carries life sentence or a prison term for up to seven years and a fine.
“I’m used to it but ‘endangering sovereignty’ is too much,” said Zubair, co-founder of the fact checking website Alt News.
“It is publicly calling me an ‘anti-national,’” he said, using a term which the Hindu right-wing deployed against critics of the BJP government after it came to power in 2014, following which Islamophobia and hate speech has become commonplace and India’s position on global democracy and press freedom indexes have fallen.
On Sunday, the Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR), a Delhi-based NGO, said the Delhi Police had registered a case against its general secretary Nadeem Khan for a speech he delivered in Hyderabad in November and they attempted to detain him without arrest or notice in Bengaluru.
The number of FIRs against Zubair that we calculated were 12; two cases in Delhi, including one registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) for tweeting the blurred image of a minor that the police found no criminality, nine in Uttar Pradesh, and one in Chhattisgarh (the same POCSO case.)
In seven cases registered in UP between 2021 and 2022 over his posts on X—one post going back to 2017—the police invoked the same sections of the erstwhile Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860, over and over—”promoting enmity between different groups”, “deliberate and malicious acts to outrage religious feeling”, among others, with a maximum punishment of five years.
After the Supreme Court granted him bail in the UP cases in July 2022—23 days after he was arrested—and disbanded the special investigation team in UP and moved the matters to the Delhi police—Zubair said he had heard nothing more about them.
The new section 152 BNS, which the police had invoked was the gravest yet, and regarded by lawyers and human rights activists as the new avatar of the colonial era section of sedition under the IPC.
“He was never asked to join the investigation in the other FIRs. It has been more than two years. No chargesheet has been filed. They are lying dormant,” said Vrinda Grover, one of India’s most famous human rights lawyers who is representing Zubair. “That tells us there was nothing ever serious in terms of investigation that was required.”
“But this is a very very grievous charge to make against anybody,” said Grover, calling section 152 “sedition on steroids”.
“When they introduced 152 and all of us said that this is an even greater monstrosity in terms of a criminal offence, we were told ‘no, no, this is a very high threshold because we have changed it from government established by law to endangering the sovereignty and unity of India,’” said Grover.
“And that is the reading the government gave to us. Now, how is it being invoked?” she said. “If I put out a tweet against hate speech, how am I endangering the unity and sovereignty of India. If you were to ask me, petitions being filed to dig up mosques are endangering the unity of India.”
FIR For Fighting Hate Speech
This latest FIR was registered by the UP police on 7 October after Zubair tweeted calling attention to Hindu cleric Yati Narsinghanand’s hate speech in Ghaziabad on 29 September, where he made derogatory remarks about the Prophet Mohammed.
In addition to this most recent speech, Zubair also posted Narsinghanand’s previous speeches targeting Muslims—still publicly available—and derogatory remarks about women politicians including from the BJP, the ruling party at the centre and in UP, which has registered the case against him.
Tagging three police handles in UP, Zubair wrote, “But he continues to give hate because the police aren't taking any action against him.”
Zubair wasn't alone in calling attention to Narsinghanand's hate speech. Other journalists had shared the video as well.
Even chief minister Yogi Adityanath, a Hindutva hardliner who routinely speaks derogatorily of Muslims, especially during election campaigns, warned of rigorous punishment.
The UP police registered an FIR against Narsinghanand on 3 October for intentionally hurting religious feelings and a chargesheet has reportedly been filed. He also faces other cases in Maharashtra and Telangana. His bail condition in a previous hate speech case requires him not to make statements that promote communal disharmony; he repeatedly defies it.
After the video with the derogatory remarks about the Prophet Mohamamd went viral, some Muslims created a commotion and raised slogans outside the temple where Narsinghanand is the chief priest in Ghaziabad’s Dasana town on 5 October.
The Ghaziabad police tweeted the same day they had chased them away, and the area was peaceful.
Narsinganand’s temple associate, Udita Tyagi, filed a complaint against Zubair, Arshad Madani, the head of an conservative Islamic seminary in UP, and Assaduddin Owaisi, the member of Parliament from Hyderabad, blaming Zubair’s social media posts for “inciting” Muslims and for gathering that “attacked” the temple.
Tyagi, who writes BJP Mahila Morcha in her X profile, filed a fresh complaint on 7 October, citing Zubair’s tweets on Narsinghanand’s speeches vilifying women politicians and Muslims—publicly available and in circulation—and making unfounded allegations about his motives for posting them.
The police registered a first information report under three bailable of the BNS: section 228—fabricating false evidence, section 356(3)—defamation and section 351(2)—criminal intimidation and two non bailable sections— 196—promoting enmity between different groups, 299—deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings.
None of the provisions are punishable with more than seven years.
‘Weaponsing The Law’
Zubair filed a petition in the Allahabad High Court to quash the FIR and interim relief against arrest, pointing out that he had posted publicly available videos and tagged the UP police, the Ghaziabad police and the DCP city, Ghaziabad.
He did this to alert them to Narsinghanand’s criminal actions so they can take necessary legal action to maintain peace and communal harmony. He had not called for any action, violence or protest against Narsinghanand, but only for the police to act according to the law.
The petition said no cognisable offense—where the police can make an arrest without a warrant—was made out in the FIR.
The section about fabricating false evidence did not apply because the videos from 2021, 2022 and September 2024 were of Narsinghanand’s publicity available speeches and there was no allegation that they were fabricated or digitally altered. Nor did criminal intimidation because there were no threats issued. Or defamation because Narsinghanand shared his own videos and they were already in the public domain.
“There is nothing that Zubair has put in the public domain that Yati has not,” said Grover, the lawyer.
“They have not denied in any of the social media reports that Yati Narsinghanand did not make these very very divisive speeches,” she said. “It is a little bewildering what the FIR is about because they are admitting to all these hate speeches.”
“The phrase that comes to mind is weaponising the law, targeting Zubair, using the law to intimidate and silence him, and it is a very very egregious abuse of power and process of law,” said Grover.
The petition before the Allahabad High Court said a team of officers in civilian clothes from the Ghaziabad police went to his home in Bengaluru on 27 October 2024, entered his courtyard and appeared to be searching for him.
They searched Zubair’s neighbour’s residence and combed through his mobile phones and laptops. The same team of officers went to his home on 28 October 2024 and questioned his father.
“However, it is a matter of record that no notice to join the investigation has been issued to the Petitioner, and the Ghaziabad police have without notice searched the Petitioner’s residential home in Bengaluru,” the petition said.
“So far as the neighbour is concerned, it is totally and completely illegal,” said Grover. “Under what authority of law can you check my neighbour's personal devices?”
On the invoking of section 152 BNS which puts Zubair at risk of arrest, Grover said, “We know there are constituencies that need to be satiated through certain arrests and now the UP police has invoked a new monstrosity in the BNS—sedition on steroids. If anything, hate speeches threaten sovereignty and unity.”
What The Supreme Court Has Said
While granting him bail on 20 July 2022 in six cases related to his social media posts registered in UP in 2021 and 2022, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court headed by DY Chandrachud, who went on to serve as the chief justice of India from November 2022 to November 2024, said the following:
“As evident from the facts narrated above, the machinery of criminal justice has been relentlessly employed against the petitioner,” said the Supreme Court. “Despite the fact that the same tweets allegedly gave rise to similar offences in the diverse FIRs mentioned above, the petitioner was subjected to multiple investigations. across the country.”
“Consequently, he would be required to hire multiple advocates across districts, file multiple applications for bail, travel to multiple districts spanning two states for the purposes of investigation, and defend himself before multiple courts, all with respect to substantially the same alleged cause of action,” said the Supreme Court.
“Resultantly, he is trapped in a vicious cycle of the criminal process where the process has itself become the punishment. It also appears that certain dormant FIRs from 2021 were activated as certain new FIRs were registered, thereby compounding the difficulties faced by the petitioner,” said the Supreme Court.
"Arrest is not meant to be and must not be used as a punitive tool because it results in one of the gravest possible consequences emanating from criminal law: the loss of personal liberty. Individuals must not be punished solely on the basis of allegations, and without a fair trial," said the Supreme Court. "When the power to arrest is exercised without application of mind and without due regard to the law, it amounts to an abuse of power. The criminal law and its processes ought not to be instrumentalized as a tool of harassment."
“According to the petitioner, he is a journalist who is the co-founder of a fact checking website and he uses Twitter as a medium of communication to dispel false news and misinformation in this age of morphed images, clickbait, and tailored videos,” said the Supreme Court. “Passing an order restricting him from posting on social media would amount to an unjustified violation of the freedom of speech and expression, and the freedom to practice his profession.”
While taking questions about his two year term as the chief justice, which his critics feel did not go far enough in protecting individual freedoms and civil liberties, Chandrachud said he had always granted bail “from A to Z”, referring to Arnab Goswami, editor of Republic TV, a new channel regarded by its critics as pro establishment, and Zubair.
“The former chief justice was remembering him (Zubair) in many of his interviews,” said Grover. “Maybe we also need to remember that between A to Z, A never had to face the wrath of law ever again. Good for him. I’m not saying journalists should. But Z repeatedly faces wrath. So A to Z, let’s not name them in the same breath.”
‘I’m Afraid For My Family’
Zubair said the UP police added section 152 to try and stop him from getting relief from the courts.
“This was not because of the fringe element but the police are doing it because they have been told to do so,” said Zubair. “There is political pressure .”
“I’m afraid for my family—my wife, kids and parents,” said Zubair. “They are worried because we all know how the UP police and government handles cases especially if it is a minority. I'm worried for my family because of what they go through because of me and because of the UP case.”
Despite the legal persecution and the sceptre of more cases, Zubair said he persisted with his work not only because of the “cause” but “deep frustration at what is going on”.
In addition to pointing out fake news, Zubair, in his X posts, has tagged journalists who misreport and peddle government propaganda as well as right wing handles that do the same.
As Zubair has persisted with his work, not only have his supporters have grown but also his detractors and with them the narrative that he is “anti India” and “anti Hindu”, a trope used by the right wing to discredit and harass people who question or criticise the ruling party, its allies, and Islamophobes who spew hate against minorities.
“They have wanted to create an anti-Hindu and anti-India narrative since 2017 and they have been partially successful in doing it,” said Zubair. “I have a lot of supporters but there are a lot of people who actually think I’m anti India and anti-Hindu.”
Zubair’s work has been recognised; last year, he received the 2023 Freedom of Expression award from the Index on Censorship, a London-based non-profit organisation, and this year, the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M K Stalin conferred him with the Kottai Ameer Communal Harmony Award.
‘The Support Helps Very Much’
The support and goodwill that has come his way was immensely helpful not just psychologically but in practical terms, said Zubair. There were others who were also standing up to fake news and Islamophobia but received little attention for the risks they take, often facing down legal persecution with meagre resources.
In his case, Zubair said people spoke up for him, many, including political and activists, tweeted about him, and there were people who came forward to support him financially so that he could fight back in court.
When he was arrested in 2022, Zubair recalled that he was trending on Twitter for almost a month and that he believed “could have pressurised” the Supreme Court into hearing his case quickly.
In addition to Indian media collectives, such as DIGIPUB (of which Article 14 is a founding member) and the Press Club of India, international media organisations, such as Reporters Without Borders and the Committee To Protect Journalists, have criticised the escalation of the case against Zubair and the implications on India’s receding media freedom.
“The support helps very much,” said Zubair. “There are people perhaps less famous or less controversial. No articles are written about them. Unfortunately, there is no one to speak about them.”
“I have well wishers who want to help me get a good lawyer, financial support. It is not easy for people to hire a good lawyer, immediately move the High Court and the Supreme Court,” said Zubair. “Sometimes people have to give up after they face one or two cases because they have no financial support.”
(Betwa Sharma is managing editor of Article 14.)
Get exclusive access to new databases, expert analyses, weekly newsletters, book excerpts and new ideas on democracy, law and society in India. Subscribe to Article 14.