UP Government Protected a Hate Speech

On 27 January 2007, while the Gorakhpur communal riots were raging, Adityanath, who was then an MP from the district, was present at a “warning meeting” organised by the Hindu Yuva Vahini. Adityanath told the gathering that “if the blood of one Hindu is shed then they will not register any FIR with the administration instead they will get 10 Muslim killed. If damage is done to shops and properties of Hindus, they would indulge in similar actions towards the Muslims. Anything and everything will be done to save the glory of Hindus and Hinduism and all should be prepared for a fight.” Going on, he said that if Muslims abduct 1 Hindu girl as a part of their love jihad campaign, Hindus would abduct 100 Muslim girls as revenge. Then Adityanath repeats himself, and asks what should Hindus do if Muslims kill even one of them? The crowd, exhorted to no small extent, replies to raucous applause- kill ten of them.

This speech, calculated to incite, resulted in fanning the flames of the communal cauldron, and should have been acted against by the police, whose personnel were also present at the spot. But they remained mere bystanders.

Two local Muslims, one of them a journalist and social worker—Pervez Parwaz- and Asad Hayat—approached the police to take action, but the latter refused. Not willing to give up, the duo then filed an application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate by invoking Section 156(3) to have an FIR lodged, but on 29 July 2008, he rejected the application.

It was only when the High Court intervened in 2008 and directed the CJM to reconsider his decision, that an FIR was finally registered. The police invoked charges under various provisions of the IPC dealing with hate speech and inciting communal enmity, and besides Adityanath, local BJP and RSS leaders who were present at the spot and cheered him on, were also named.

The state CID (Crime Investigation Department) took seven years to investigate the case, and in the meanwhile, the petitioner’s plea for an independent agency to probe the matter was stoutly resisted by the government.

It was only in 2014 that the investigating officer submitted his draft report—terming it as the DFR (Draft Final Report) —and finding that a prima facie case was made out against those named in the FIR, sought the government’s sanction to prosecute Adityanath and his cohorts. For two years the UP government did nothing in this regard. The question arises- why did the police did not submit a proper final report even after apparently investigating the case with diligence over so many years?

In 2017, when Adityanath stormed to power as Uttar Pradesh CM, in a sort of foregone conclusion, the Principal Secretary of the government under him moved swiftly to deny sanction to prosecute. The government said that there was no credible evidence against Adityanath, and that the CD of the speech had been tampered with. However, it did not utter a single word about a piece of clinching evidence which would have done in Adityanath.