SC declines to quash hate speech case against Mukhtar Ansari's son

A bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Pankaj Mithal refused to quash the FIR lodged against Umar Ansari, who was co-accused for allegedly threatening government officials with payback at a public meeting stage in the Pahadpur area of Mau during the polls.

The Supreme Court on Friday declined to quash criminal proceedings initiated against tjhe son of gangster-turned-politican Mukhtar Ansari for allegedly giving hate speech in a rally during the 2022 Uttar Pradesh Assembly polls.

A bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Pankaj Mithal refused to quash the FIR lodged against Umar Ansari, who was co-accused for allegedly threatening government officials with payback at a public meeting stage in the Pahadpur area of Mau during the polls.

Advertisement

It said that the brother of Suheldev Bhartiya Samaj Party (SBSP) MLA, Abbas Ansari, must "face the trial" and it will not set aside the impugned decision of the high court refusing to entertain the application of the Ansari brothers filed under Section 482 CrPC.

During the hearing, the lawyer appearing for the appellant argued that the alleged remarks were not made by Umar Ansari and he was charged for merely sharing the stage when his brother allegedly made the controversial remarks.

Advertisement

Mau police, on March 3 last year, booked the Ansari bothers under section 171F (offence of undue influence or personation at an election) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of IPC, after a video of the speech went viral on social media.

MLA Abbas Ansari, recently surrendered before an MP/MLA court after the ACJM had issued a non-bailable warrant against him and his brother Umar Ansari in the case. He reached the court with an advocate dodging the Uttar Pradesh Police, which had been looking for him but had failed to arrest him.

Advertisement

Also read | Centre moves plea before SC seeking extension of ED Director's term, court to hear tomorrow

Also read | SC stunned to see JKLF chief Yasin Malik appear before it in person, judges recuse from hearing

Advertisement

Advertisement