Liberal Approach Of Courts Encouraging Anti-National Acts: Allahabad High Court Denies Bail In 'Pakistan Zindabad' Facebook Post Case
Applicant had allegedly shared a Facebook post that allegedly propagated “Zihad”, included slogans such as “Pakistan Zindabad”.
Justice Siddharth, Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has refused to grant bail to a 62-year-old man, Ansar Ahmad Siddique, accused of sharing a provocative and seditious post on Facebook, which included the slogan “Pakistan Zindabad”.
It was alleged that the applicant had shared a Facebook post that allegedly propagated “Zihad”, included slogans such as “Pakistan Zindabad”, and urged others to support their “Pakistani brothers.”
A Bench of Justice Siddharth held, “Clearly the act of the applicant is disrespectful to the Constitution and its ideals and also his act amounts to challenging the sovereignty of India and adversely affecting unity and integrity to India by sharing anti social and anti Indian post.”
The Court noted that the accused, being a senior citizen born in independent India, ought to have exhibited a sense of constitutional responsibility. Instead, his actions revealed a blatantly anti-national disposition, which the Court said, does not entitle him to the protection of liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Further invoking Article 51-A of the Constitution, the Court underscored that under clause (a), every citizen has a fundamental duty to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals, institutions, the National Flag, and the National Anthem and under clause (c), citizens are obligated to uphold and protect the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India.
Advocate Devesh Kumar Shukla appeared for the Applicant.
The post, it was claimed, was aimed at provoking communal sentiments, inciting violence, and undermining national unity. The State further alleged that the post was uploaded shortly after the Pahalgam terrorist attack in Kashmir, in which 26 civilians lost their lives. This timing, according to the State counsel, “proves that the applicant supports the terrorists' act also on religious grounds.”
The Court remarked, “Commission of such offences is becoming routine affair in this country because the courts are liberal and tolerant towards such acts of people with anti national bent of mind. It is not a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail at this stage.”
In rejecting the bail plea, the Court directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings and conclude the trial at the earliest.
Cause Title: Ansar Ahmad Siddique v. State of U.P., [2025:AHC:100248]
Appearance:
Applicant: Advocates Devesh Kumar Shukla, Dharmesh Kumar Shukla
