HC gives UP govt 2 weeks to respond to Abbas Ansari' plea in hate speech case
Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court on Monday granted two weeks' time to the state govt to file its reply in response to a petition filed by Abbas Ansari, son of ex-MLA
Mukhtar Ansari
in a 2022 hate speech case.
It further directed inspector Gangaram, who is a complainant and opposite party in the case, to file his reply.
Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh passed the order in a petition filed by Ansari challenging the forensic report related to audio of alleged hate speech.
The court posted the matter on June 11, 2025.
In the meantime, Gangaram may also file counter affidavit, if he so desires, the court added.
Ansari is charged with sharing the dais in a rally in Mau in 2022, where his brother allegedly threatened govt officials with payback, after election results.
Mau police, in March 2022 booked the Ansari brothers under section 171F (offence of undue influence at an election) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of IPC, after a video of the speech went viral during the election campaign.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
38 minutes ago
- First Post
How Allahabad High Court's verdict against Indira Gandhi 50 years ago resulted in Emergency
On June 12, 1975, the Allahabad High Court declared then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi's Lok Sabha election from Rae Bareli void, sparking a domino effect that led to the imposition of Emergency. Here's how it all happened read more It has been 50 years since a High Court's judgement against India's prime minister changed the country's trajectory. On June 12, 1975, the Allahabad High Court declared then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi's Lok Sabha election void, sparking a domino effect that led to the imposition of Emergency a few days later. The verdict caused a political storm and had ramifications for the entire country. But why was Indira Gandhi's election set aside? We take a relook. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Petition against Indira Gandhi In the 1971 Lok Sabha polls, Indira Gandhi, who had floated the Congress (R) — the breakaway faction of the Congress — after being expelled from the parent party in 1969, defeated her opponent Raj Narain by 1,10,000 votes from the Rae Bareli constituency in Uttar Pradesh. Her party also registered a landslide victory in the elections, winning 352 out of the 518 Lok Sabha seats. Raj Narain, the Samyukta Socialist Party candidate, however, challenged Gandhi's election from Rae Bareli on April 24, 1971. He approached the Allahabad High Court alleging electoral malpractices and misuse of government machinery by the then Prime Minister. Giving no weightage to the petition, people did not anticipate what would come next. The petition was first listed before Justice William Broome, the last British judge of the Allahabad High Court. However, he retired in December 1971 and the petition reached two different benches — one of Justice BN Lokur and of Justice KN Srivastava. Due to their retirements, the petition went before the bench of Justice Jagmohan Lal Sinha in early 1975. The verdict that changed India The recording of oral evidence began on February 12, 1975. Several big names appeared as witnesses — PN Haksar, then vice chairman of the Planning Commission, appeared for Gandhi. While LK Advani, the then president of the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, former Bihar Chief Minister Karpoori Thakur and Congress-O president S Nijalingappa deposed for Raj Narain. The Prime Minister was also cross-examined for two straight days — a first in the history of independent India. As Gandhi appeared before the court on March 18, 1975, she was given a chair on an elevated platform so she was sitting on the same level as the judge, as per the Indian Express report. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Then-PM Indira Gandhi was cross-examined for two days at the Allahabad High Court. After the arguments concluded, the High Court shut down for summer vacations on May 23, 1975. Now, it was time to wait for Justice Sinha's verdict. Under immense pressure, he is said to have locked himself up at home, with visitors being told that he is in Ujjain to see his elder brother. Justice Vipin Sinha, Justice Sinha's son, recalled the pressure on his family at the time. 'I was in Class 11 then and those days were very hard for us. We got a lot of very abusive calls, so much so that we did not allow our father to answer the phone,' he was quoted as saying by Indian Express. Then came the judgement day. Announcing his ruling on June 12, 1975, in Courtroom No 24 of the Allahabad High Court, Justice Sinha said, 'This petition is allowed and the election of Smt. Indira Nehru Gandhi, Respondent No. 1, to the Lok Sabha is declared void… (Indira Gandhi) accordingly stands disqualified for a period of six years from the date of this order.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Justice Sinha found Gandhi guilty on two counts — for using a gazetted officer, her personal secretary Yashpal Kapoor, as her election agent, and for employing Uttar Pradesh government officers to arrange rostrums, loudspeakers and barricades for her election speeches. The court ruled in her favour on other charges –– for using choppers of the Indian Air Force to go to Rae Bareli for her election campaigning and file nominations, invoking religion to influence electors and distributing quilts, blankets, dhotis and liquor to get votes, and so on. Justice Sinha's final 258-page ruling meant immediate disqualification for Indira Gandhi as an MP and her dismissal as Prime Minister. However, after her lawyers argued that her removal would create a political vacuum in the country, the court granted a 20-day stay on the verdict. Meanwhile, Gandhi moved the Supreme Court on appeal. The case was heard by a single-judge vacation bench of Justice VR Krishna Iyer. On June 24, 1975, the apex court granted a 'conditional stay' against the Allahabad High Court ruling. While Indira Gandhi could continue as PM, her rights as an MP were restricted. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD She could not vote in Parliament, take part in proceedings of the House, or get a salary as an MP until the SC finally decides the appeal. Indira Gandhi imposes Emergency Days after the HC's ruling, Indira Gandhi invoked Article 352 of the Constitution to impose an internal Emergency . This period lasted for 21 months, during which people's fundamental rights were suppressed and dissent curbed across the country. The media were gagged and opposition leaders jailed. Seen as the Constitution's darkest chapter, the Emergency was a real test for the Indian democracy. With inputs from agencies
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Cash row: Congress seeks SC report on allegations against Justice Varma
The Congress has asked the government to share with it the report of a Supreme Court-appointed committee that probed graft allegations against Justice Yashwant Varma so that it can firm up its stand on the issue of his impeachment before the Monsoon session of Parliament, party sources said on Thursday. The government, however, is yet to respond, the sources said. Several burnt sacks containing cash were allegedly discovered at Justice Varma's residence in Delhi after a fire broke out there in March, when he was a Delhi High Court judge. Though the judge, who was later transferred to the Allahabad High Court, has claimed ignorance about the cash, the Supreme Court-appointed committee indicted him after speaking to a number of witnesses and recording his statement. Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju has initiated discussions with all political parties to bring an impeachment motion against Justice Varma in Parliament's Monsoon session, starting from July 21. The Congress sources said the party has asked Rijiju to share the report of the committee so that it can firm up its stand on the issue of impeachment. The minister is yet to get back to the Congress, they said. Last week, Rijiju underlined the government's resolve to take all political parties on board in moving the impeachment motion against Justice Varma, saying corruption in the judiciary cannot be approached through a "political prism". He said the government wants the exercise to be a "collaborative effort". According to the Judges (Inquiry) Act of 1968, once a motion to remove a judge is admitted in any of the Houses, the speaker or the chairman, as the case may be, will constitute a three-member committee to investigate the grounds on which the removal (or, in popular term, impeachment) has been sought. The committee consists of the chief justice of India (CJI) or a Supreme Court judge, the chief justice of one of the 25 high courts and a " distinguished jurist". Rijiju, however, has said the present case is "slightly different" as an in-house committee formed by former CJI Sanjiv Khanna has already submitted its report. "So what is to be done in this matter, we will take a call," he said earlier. The minister had said the process has to be followed, but how to "integrate the inquiry already conducted" needs to be decided. Following the Supreme Court's in-house inquiry, former CJI Sanjeev Khanna is believed to have prodded Varma to resign but he dug in his heels. The apex court has since transferred him to his parent cadre, the Allahabad High Court, where he has not been assigned any judicial work. Former CJI Khanna had written to the president and the prime minister, recommending Justice Varma's impeachment.
NDTV
4 hours ago
- NDTV
When A Court Ruling Against A Sitting PM Changed India's Political History
On a sweltering summer morning 50 years ago, anticipation gripped Courtroom No 24 of the Allahabad High Court. The stakes couldn't have been higher. At 10 am, Justice Jagmohan Lal Sinha delivered a landmark verdict that would alter the course of Indian politics. On June 12, 1975, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi's 1971 Lok Sabha election from Rae Bareli was declared void on grounds of electoral malpractice. It was a political thunderclap. The ruling didn't only unseat a leader, it triggered a chain of events that led to the imposition of the Emergency, a 21-month period often described as the darkest chapter in India's democratic history. The Unmaking Of A Mandate Indira Gandhi's troubles began after the 1971 general elections. Riding high on her popularity after the Bangladesh war, she defeated socialist leader Raj Narain by over one lakh votes. But Narain wasn't done. He filed a petition in the Allahabad High Court, alleging that Gandhi used the government machinery for her campaign. The court upheld only two charges: the illegal use of loudspeakers, stages, and security forces, arranged by officials on government duty, and the employment of Yashpal Kapur, her aide who hadn't officially resigned from government service before becoming her election agent. Everything else, claims of distributing liquor and blankets, misusing the Air Force, and overspending, was dismissed for lack of evidence. The two violations were enough. Indira Gandhi was disqualified from holding elected office for six years. A serving Prime Minister was told: You cannot be a Member of Parliament. The judgment stunned her party and followers. The opposition, meanwhile, smelled political change. Crowds gathered across cities. Protests erupted. The media covered every angle. All eyes turned to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court And The Midnight Decision On June 24, the Supreme Court gave a partial stay, allowing Gandhi to remain Prime Minister but restricted her rights as an MP. She could attend Parliament, but not vote or receive a salary as a lawmaker. Thirteen days later, on the night of June 25, Indira Gandhi invoked Article 352 of the Constitution. The Emergency was declared. The country would not be the same for the next 21 months. The Emergency Of 1975 The Emergency suspended fundamental rights. Political opponents were jailed. Newspapers and the Press were gagged. Student movements were crushed. The Constitution itself was amended to retroactively shield Indira Gandhi's election from judicial scrutiny through the 39th Constitutional Amendment. The move was widely condemned, both domestically and internationally. Many saw it as an attempt by Gandhi to protect her political power at any cost. Indira Gandhi Assassinated India eventually voted her out in 1977, but the Janata Party government didn't last long. In 1980, the country reposed faith in Indira Gandhi again. On October 31, 1984, Indira Gandhi was assassinated by her own bodyguards at her Delhi residence. She was 66. The attack, a retaliation for Operation Blue Star, plunged India into an abyss. Thousands of Sikhs were killed in riots that followed. Operation Blue Star, ordered by Indira Gandhi on June 1, 1984, was a military operation carried out by the Indian Army in June 1984 to remove Sikh militants who had taken refuge in the Golden Temple complex in Amritsar, Punjab. A Grandson Faces A Familiar Fall Nearly five decades later, the Gandhi name returned to the headlines for eerily similar reasons. On March 23, 2023, Rahul Gandhi, her grandson and a sitting MP from Wayanad, was disqualified from Parliament. His offence: a criminal defamation case over a comment linking the "Modi" surname to corruption. "Why do all thieves have Modi in their names?" he said at a 2019 rally. The Lok Sabha Secretariat issued a notice: Rahul Gandhi stands disqualified as a Member of Parliament. He, too, appealed. And like his grandmother, he received relief from the Supreme Court, which stayed the conviction and reinstated his parliamentary status in August 2023.
