---

The court made the observation while rejecting the bail plea of an accused in connection with violence that broke out in Bareilly in September.

---

The Allahabad High Court has said that raising the slogan “gustakh-e-nabi ki ek saza, sar tan se juda, sar tan se juda” amounts to a challenge to the authority of law and to India’s sovereignty and integrity.

The observation was made on Wednesday by a single-judge bench of Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal while rejecting the bail plea of an accused in connection with violence that broke out in Bareilly in September.

The court said the slogan, which translates to “the only punishment for disrespecting the prophet is beheading”, incites people to an “armed rebellion” and attracts punishment under Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita section 152, dealing with acts that endanger the sovereignty, unity and integrity of the country.

The bench also noted that the slogan runs contrary to the basic tenets of Islam and has no basis in the Quran or other Muslim religious texts.

At the same time, the court observed that religious slogans such as “‘nara-e-takbir’ followed by ‘Allahu Akbar’”, “Jo bole so nihaal, Sat Sri Akal”, “Jai Shree Ram” or “Har Har Mahadev” do not constitute an offence unless they are “maliciously used to intimidate persons belonging to other religions”.

According to the prosecution, two Muslim community leaders allegedly instigated a gathering on September 26 at a college to protest alleged atrocities and the registration of false cases against Muslim youth. Despite prohibitory orders banning assemblies of more than five persons, over 500 people allegedly gathered, raised slogans against the government and called for beheading.

The prosecution said violence erupted when police attempted to intervene.

In denying bail, the court said that while the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech and expression, the right is subject to reasonable restrictions. Shouting slogans that call for beheading is “not only against the constitutional object but also a challenge to the lawful authority of the Indian legal system”, it said.

The bench added that material on record showed the bail applicant was part of an unlawful assembly that raised objectionable slogans, injured police personnel and damaged public and private property, amounting to an offence against the state.