The Supreme Court of India has directed the Haryana government to clarify its position on granting sanction to prosecute a professor accused of making objectionable statements. The court expressed concern over the prolonged delay in the state's decision.
Court Questions the Delay in Prosecution Sanction
During a recent hearing, Additional Solicitor General S V Raju informed a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant and comprising Justice Joymalya Bagchi that since the Supreme Court had stayed the framing of charges, the Haryana government had not yet made a decision on granting sanction for prosecution. The case pertains to statements allegedly made by the professor during an event referred to as 'Operation Sindoor'.
The bench, in its order, noted that although the chargesheet was filed in August last year, the sanction from the state was still pending. The court instructed the ASG to seek instructions on whether the state is inclined to show magnanimity by not granting the sanction. The matter has been scheduled for a follow-up hearing after six weeks.
Background of the Case and SC's Earlier Intervention
The professor, Mahmudabad, was arrested on May 18 following First Information Reports (FIRs) registered based on complaints by Renu Bhatia, Chairperson of the Haryana State Commission for Women, and a BJP functionary who is the sarpanch of Jatheri village.
Earlier, on May 21, the Supreme Court had granted interim bail to Mahmudabad. However, it had also ordered the Haryana Director General of Police (DGP) to constitute a Special Investigation Team (SIT) comprising IPS officers. This SIT was tasked with probing the bona fides and context of the allegedly objectionable statements made by the professor.
SC's Caution on Rights and Duties
Expressing its view on the broader discourse surrounding the case, the bench made a significant observation. It stated, "We don't know what's happening. Everyone talks only about their, this and that right as if for the last 75 years the country is only distributing rights without teaching them their duties."
The court also issued a clear caution, emphasizing that if the competent authority in Haryana decides to close the case by declining sanction, it should not be interpreted as a licence for the professor to make irresponsible statements in the future. The bench expressed confidence that the individual would behave responsibly going forward.
The Supreme Court's push for clarity places the ball firmly in the Haryana government's court, with its decision on prosecution sanction now under judicial scrutiny. The next hearing in six weeks is awaited to bring further clarity to this legal standoff.
