Ashoka prof Ali Mahmudabad can write again, but there's a caveat: SC relaxes bail ter
Ashoka prof Ali Mahmudabad can write again, but there's a caveat: SC relaxes bail terms, wants probe finished in 4 weeks
M.U.H
16/07/202532
The Supreme Court on Wednesday relaxed the conditions of bail for Ashoka University professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad, saying that he can write articles and opinions online again, except on matters that are sub judice.
The court also directed the Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the case to complete its investigation within four weeks. It will also not be necessary for Ali Khan Mahmudabad to appear before the SIT now, as it acknowledged he had cooperated with the probe and deposited his gadgets.
The apex court had granted interim bail to Mahmudabad on May 21 following his arrest by Haryana Police on May 18 over his two Facebook posts related to Operation Sindoor.
At the time, the court also directed Haryana to set up an SIT to probe the case.
What's the case against Ali Khan Mahmudabad?
Mahmudabad was arrested following two complaints, including one by the Haryana State Commission for Women.
Mahmudabad’s post, which praised the military’s restraint while warning against “warmongering and performative patriotism”, drew criticism from the Haryana State Commission for Women.
Commission chairperson Renu Bhatia alleged that he had disparaged woman officers, particularly Colonel Sofiya Qureshi and Wing Commander Vyomika Singh, who briefed the media after the cross-border strike. After her complaint, an FIR was registered against him.
The second case was registered at the Rai police station on the complaint of local BJP youth leader and Jatheri village sarpanch Yogesh.
What happened at last SC hearing?
During the last hearing in the case, the Supreme Court had directed the SIT to confine its probe against Mahmudabad to the contents of the two FIRs registered over his Facebook posts on ‘Operation Sindoor’.
This was after senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who appeared for Mahmudabad, expressed apprehensions that the SIT may go beyond the FIRs and told the bench that the SIT had asked Mahmudabad to submit his electronic devices.
The bench said the SIT should not need Mahmudabad’s phone and other electronic devices since the two FIRs were already on record.
“What is the need for devices? Do not try to expand the scope of the investigation. SIT is free to form its opinion, but do not go left or right,” the court said.
