Ashoka University professor held for ‘endangering unity' over post on Operation Sindoor ; aculty slams arrest as ‘calculated harassment'

Time of India

19-05-2025

Haryana State Women's Commission chairperson Renu Bhatia and BJP Yuva Morcha general secretary Yogesh Jatheri filed separate FIRs, leading to charges including endangering India's sovereignty.
GURGAON: Days after the state women's commission summoned him, and he clarified that his comments had been completely misunderstood, Ashoka University associate professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad was arrested on Sunday and charged with, among other things, endangering India's sovereignty, unity and integrity for his comments on Operation Sindoor.
The basis for the FIR that was filed at Rai police station in Sonipat, where the leading liberal arts and sciences university is located, was a complaint from Haryana State Women's Commission chairperson Renu
Bhatia
.
On May 13, Bhatia had dispatched the summons to Mahmudabad. A day later, when he skipped appearing before the panel, saying it had no jurisdiction in the matter, she promised followup action.
While DCP (crime) Narender Singh confirmed the arrest was related to the FIR filed on Bhatia's complaint, a second FIR was filed at the same police station against Mahmudabad on Sunday. The complainant in the other case is Yogesh
Jatheri
, the sarpanch of Jatheri village and a general secretary of BJP's Yuva Morcha.
According to police, Jatheri's and Bhatia's complaints were unrelated.
Ashoka University's faculty association calls professor's arrest 'calculated harassment'
The professor, the son of 'Raja of Mahmudabad' Mohd Amir Mohd Khan 'Suleiman', is an MPhil in history and a PhD in social sciences from Cambridge, and heads Ashoka's political science department.
He was taken into custody by a Haryana Police team from his residence in Delhi on Sunday morning and produced in a Sonipat court, which remanded him in police custody for two days.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Free P2,000 GCash eGift
UnionBank Credit Card
Apply Now
Undo
The next hearing is scheduled at 2pm on May 20.
Ashoka University's faculty association stood behind Mahmudabad, calling the arrest 'calculated harassment'. 'The faculty association of Ashoka University strongly condemns the arrest of Prof Mahmudabad on groundless and untenable charges. We condemn the calculated harassment to which he has been subjected: after being arrested early in the morning from his home in New Delhi, he was taken to Sonipat, not allowed access to necessary medication, and driven around for hours without any communication about his whereabouts.
The faculty association stands in full support of our colleague — an invaluable member of the university community, a beloved and respected teacher and friend to his students, and a deeply responsible citizen, who brings all his energy and learning to promoting communal harmony and the greater good.'
In the notice to Mahmudabad, the Bhatia-led panel had characterised his social media post of May 9 as an attempt to 'malign national military efforts and sow communal divisions'. Referring to his observations on the press briefings during the military operation by Col Sophiya Qureshi and
Wing
Commander Vyomika Singh, the panel alleged they disparaged women in the armed forces.
What did the prof write?
Mahmudabad had on May 14 clarified that what he had written in his May 9 post 'solely express concern over the rhetorical excesses and reckless warmongering exhibited by certain sections of the civilian public'. In the long post, Mahmudabad made the point that it's the poor who suffered from war while 'politicians and defence companies' benefitted from it. 'There are those who are mindlessly advocating for a war but they have never seen one let alone lived in or visited a conflict zone,' he wrote.
On Col Qureshi and Wing Commander Singh, he had written in his May 9 post that he was 'very happy to see so many right-wing commentators applauding' the Indian Army officer, but 'perhaps they can equally loudly demand that victims of mob lynchings, arbitrary bulldozing… are protected as Indian citizens'. 'The optics of two women soldiers presenting their findings is important, but optics must translate to reality on the ground, otherwise it's just hypocrisy,' he wrote.
What were the objections?
In its notice, the women's panel objected to his use of terms like 'genocide', 'hypocrisy' and 'dehumanisation'. 'There is also a misrepresentation of facts surrounding India's counter-terror operations, framed in a way that may encourage unrest or civil disturbance, a violation of women's dignity by indirectly questioning their role and legitimacy in military service, and a breach of ethical guidelines for university faculty under UGC Regulations, 2018,' the notice read.
What was the prof's counter?
There were no comments from anyone representing Mahmudabad on Sunday. In his reaction to the commission's May 14 summons, he had said, 'The summons issued to me fail to highlight how my post is contrary to the rights of or laws for women. Contrary to the allegations, my post appreciated the fact that the armed forces chose Colonel Sophiya Qureshi and Wing Commander Vyomika Singh for the press conference to highlight the fact that the dream of the founders of our Republic, of an India which is united in its diversity, is still very much alive.
I even applauded members of the right wing who supported Col Qureshi and invited them to have the same attitude for common Indian Muslims who face demonisation and persecution on a daily basis. If anything, my entire comments were about safeguarding the lives of both citizens and soldiers.'
What are the charges in FIRs?
In the FIR filed on Bhatia's complaint, police invoked sections 152 (acts that endanger India's sovereignty, unity and integrity), 353 (statements conducing to public mischief) and 79 (word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman).
The FIR filed on Jatheri's complaint invoked section 196 (promoting enmity between different groups), 197 (imputations and assertions that could be prejudicial to national integration), 152 and 299 (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs).
DCP (crime) Singh said, 'There were two complaints, one by Renu Bhatia regarding the Facebook post and disregarding the commission's summons, and the other by a sarpanch which stated that the professor had said things to him.'
What do complainants say?
Asked about her complaint, Bhatia told TOI on Sunday, 'We do not accept anybody speaking inappropriately about any woman, let alone a woman in uniform being insulted. We visited the university on May 15 as Prof Ali did not appear before the commission on May 14. The university told us he was not there. By the time the commission could proceed, Prof Ali was believed to have been sent away. University officials, including the registrar and vice-chancellor, did not speak about the matter, which further annoyed the commission.
' She said she had filed the police complaint on May 15.
When TOI asked Jatheri what his complaint was about, he said, 'The matter is of serious nature. I have filed a complaint for the comments he made against me.' Asked what these specific comments were, Jatheri again said they were 'serious' but refused to elaborate.