Latest news with #AshokaUniversity
Scroll.in
2 days ago
- Politics
- Scroll.in
From Assam to Haryana, arbitrary arrests of social media users make a mockery of the Constitution
It has been just over three weeks since the Indian Army launched Operation Sindoor as a response to the terror attack in Pahalgam that left 26 people dead. Since then, the military action has been used as a cover to crack down on social media users across the spectrum. In Assam, 81 'anti-nationals' have been arrested for 'sympathising' with Pakistan, the chief minister said on Sunday. Arrests in the wake of the military action have also been reported from Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Meghalaya, Tripura, Haryana and Maharashtra, though an exact number is not known. The case that garnered the most attention was the arrest on May 18 of Ashoka University professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad. In a Facebook post, he pointed to the irony of Hindutva commentators praising Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, who had represented the Army during media briefings, even as they ignored the mob lynchings, arbitrary bulldozing of homes and other hate crimes against Indian Muslims. When the Supreme Court granted Mahmudabad interim bail on May 21, Justice Surya Kant declared that the professor should have used ' neutral language ' rather than using words with 'dual meaning'. On Friday, the Kolkata police travelled to Gurugram to arrest 22-year-old Sharmishtha Panoli, an Instagram influencer and law student, for a video posted on social media that allegedly hurt religious sentiments. In the video, which Panoli deleted after a backlash online, she questioned the 'silence' of Bollywood celebrities on the military operation and also made remarks about Islam. Bharatiya Janata Party MP, actress Kangana Ranaut, called for Panoli to be released immediately, despite the 'unpleasant words' she used in her video. The language used in the video was distasteful and far from being 'neutral' – but that should not matter. In these actions, it has become clear that there is a heavy price to pay for contrariness of any kind in India. In this climate, one would think politically 'neutral' individuals would be safe from public criticism. But earlier this month, Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri was attacked on social media for simply doing his job, after he announced at a media briefing that a ceasefire had been reached with Pakistan. Even his daughter was dragged into the controversy as trolls blamed him for the decision rather than the political establishment that made it. In the battle between political and ideological agendas, a disquieting silence is being forced on the famously argumentative Indian. Arrests of this sort make a mockery of the right to freedom of speech and expression enshrined in the Indian Constitution.
Hindustan Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Rights and duties as per the Constitution
Odd as it may seem, I sometimes wonder if our judges are their own worst enemies. At times, they can say the strangest things — almost as if they got carried away. Do they not worry about its implications? Are they not concerned about its impact? Let me illustrate my point by referring to Justice Surya Kant's and Justice Kotiswar Singh's handling of the Ali Khan Mahmudabad case. First, they accused Mahmudabad of 'dog-whistling' and using words with double meanings. They said his 'choice of words is deliberately made to insult, humiliate or cause some kind of discomfort to others'. But they didn't say what words they were referring to? Instead, they went on 'he could convey these very feelings in a very simple language … use terminology, which is simple, respectful and very neutral'. But, again, they didn't identify what they were alluding to. This prompted the scholar Gautam Bhatia to point out that a dog-whistle is usually at a frequency inaudible to human ears. So, what part of Mahmudabad's Facebook posts were dog-whistles? Who were the 'dogs' he was whistling to? And who were the 'non-dogs' he was ignoring? None of this was pointed out by the judges. Should it not have been? Instead, they said: 'To holistically understand the complexity of the phraseology employed and for proper appreciation of some of the expressions used in these two online posts, we direct the Director General of Police, Haryana, to constitute an SIT.' But this body will only comprise police officers. Surely lexicographers like Samuel Johnson and Noah Webster would have been more appropriate? Actually, this was the least of the concerns aroused by the two judges' comments. More worrisome are these sentences: 'Everybody talks of rights, I have the right to do this, right to do that … without telling you what your duty is towards the nation.' But whilst the Constitution specifically identifies the fundamental rights conferred on us as citizens, it doesn't identify constitutionally enforceable duties. We don't even have a duty to be patriotic. We have every right to be sceptical and questioning rather than wrap ourselves in the flag. So, on what basis were the judges equating rights with duties? They did not say. However, it is what they said about the students and faculty of Ashoka University, where Mahmudabad is a professor, that is most perplexing. 'If they dare to do anything we will pass an order …it is not acceptable to us that some of these so-called private universities open, and then all kinds of elements join hands there, and they start making irresponsible statements. We know how to deal with these people.' What on earth prompted this? They simply threw this comment into the mix of other things they said without any explanation or justification. It is almost as if a fantastical leap of thought led them from one issue to another, even if they are not at all connected. So, what prompts judges to speak like this? These are not things they might say when they are playing devil's advocate to explore the depths of a particular argument. This sounds very much like their own opinions. And that leaves one to wonder whether they are playing to the gallery rather than sticking loyally to their duty as guarantors of our constitutional rights. The mere fact such a question can be asked suggests they spoke too much. At the very least, they were not judicious. However, the bit that truly stunned me is what Gautam Bhatia wrote in this newspaper. He was referring to the gag order the two judges placed on Mahmudabad. He wrote: 'It is important to point out that the judiciary does not have the power to gag or silence someone; it's only empowered to determine whether the government's decision to do so is constitutional or unconstitutional.' When I asked Bhatia whether this meant the judges have exercised powers they do not have, his discreet but telling reply was they had acted 'beyond their jurisdiction'. All I can say is oh dear! Karan Thapar is the author of Devil's Advocate: The Untold Story. The views expressed are personal
News18
4 days ago
- Health
- News18
Updated Covid Vaccines Not Urgently Needed With Mild Surge: Former CSIR-IGIB Chief To News18
Last Updated: There's no need to panic, said Anurag Agrawal, as Covid-19, in its current form, is expected to stay mild for the majority Updated Covid vaccines may not be necessary at this stage, especially in a country like India, where the younger population is less vulnerable to severe outcomes, Anurag Agrawal, former director of the Institute of Genomics and Integrative Biology (IGIB), told News18. IGIB is a national laboratory of the Council of Scientific & Industrial Research (CSIR). India is witnessing a Covid-19 surge, with a total of 1,010 active cases as of May 26, 2025. The highest number of active cases is in Kerala (430), followed by Maharashtra (210), Delhi (104), and Gujarat (83). 'The current rise in cases can be attributed to waning antibody levels and minor mutations in the virus's spike protein," said Agrawal. Globally, Agrawal believes the newly updated Covid-19 vaccines are not proving highly effective against emerging strains. 'While mRNA technology allows for rapid updates to match circulating variants, it remains the only platform capable of such flexibility. Other vaccine technologies take much longer to develop and distribute; by the time they are ready, the infection wave often begins to fade," said Agrawal, who is presently dean of the Trivedi School of Biosciences at Ashoka University. advetisement Even with mRNA, he said, there is ongoing debate about its use, hinting towards concerns ranging from long-term safety data to accessibility. 'India is currently seeing cases of the JN.1 strain. However, with a relatively younger demographic and a lower risk of severe disease, there is doubt among experts whether updating vaccines for this specific strain is worthwhile," he said. According to Agrawal, who is also head of the Koita Centre for Digital Health at Ashoka University, many people may be silent carriers of the virus, showing no symptoms. Additionally, actual case numbers could be much higher than reported, as fewer people are opting for Covid-19 testing. Despite this, he maintains that no drastic measures are required beyond surveillance and preparedness. 'The susceptibility to severe illness remains low. For those who are highly vulnerable, such as the elderly or immunocompromised, simple precautions remain the best line of defence," said Agrawal, who is a well-known physician-scientist. 'In short, the message is clear: there's no need to panic. Covid-19, in its current form, is expected to stay mild for the majority. A calm, precautionary approach is all that is needed." About the Author Himani Chandna First Published: May 31, 2025, 07:00 IST
Business Standard
4 days ago
- Politics
- Business Standard
SC grants interim bail to Ashoka professor, raps him for 'choice of words'
Ashoka University's Associate Professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad gets interim bail amid Operation Sindoor post row, with Supreme Court ordering SIT probe Shine Jacob Abhineet Kumar The Supreme Court on Wednesday ordered the immediate release of Ashoka University professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad, who was arrested for his controversial social media post over ' Operation Sindoor '. While extending relief, the court criticised Mahmudabad's 'choice of words' and directed the formation of a special investigation team (SIT) to probe the matter. Following the court's decision, Ashoka University issued a statement saying, 'We are relieved and heartened by Prof Ali Khan Mahmudabad being granted interim bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It has provided great comfort to his family and all of us at Ashoka University.' A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Sanjay Kishan granted interim bail to Mahmudabad, who is the Associate Professor and Head of the Political Science Department at the Haryana-based university. The court said his release would be subject to the furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Sonipat. First Published: May 21 2025 | 5:10 PM IST
The Hindu
5 days ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Criminal charges against Ashoka University professor are ‘outrageous and absurd', say a group of former civil servants
Terming the criminal charges against associate professor of Political Science Ashoka University, Ali Khan Mahmudabad, 'outrageous and absurd', the 'Constitutional Conduct Group', comprising 79 former civil servants, in a statement on Thursday (May 29, 2025) said that Mr. Mahmudabad's two social media posts related to Operation Sindoor, for which he has been charged, were in fact 'thoughtful and measured'. Also Read | Congress accuses BJP of trying to take political advantage of Operation Sindoor 'He [Prof. Mahmudabad] praised the restraint of the Indian Army and noted the importance of the 'optics' of Colonel Sofiya Qureshi as a face of the Indian armed forces during the press briefings at the time that the hostilities were underway, but added that the symbolism of this would be hypocritical if lynching and bulldozing of homes continued,'' the signatories stated. They include Anita Agnihotri, former Secretary, Department of Social Justice Empowerment; Chandrashekar Balakrishnan, former Secretary, Coal; and Sharad Behar, former Chief Secretary of Madhya Pradesh. The Constitutional Conduct Group's statement said the perils and consequences of suppressing free speech by the unjust application of criminal law could be profoundly corrosive for a society. Also Read | Ashoka University professor arrest: Haryana forms SIT headed by Sonipat Police chief Stating that the criminal charges pertained to stringent Sections of India's new criminal law code, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, including Section 152, which penalises acts 'endangering sovereignty, unity and integrity of India', the group said the move closely echoes the language of the colonial era sedition law under the now repealed Indian Penal Code. Other crimes for which the academic has been charged include Section 196(1)(b) on disturbing communal harmony and public tranquillity; Section 197(1)(c) on assertions likely to cause disharmony; and Section 299, which criminalises 'deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings'. The group said many students and faculty members had come forward to express heartening solidarity with Prof. Mahmudabad, even though the management of Ashoka University has remained conspicuously silent on the unjust criminal targeting of their faculty. Mr. Mahmudabad was arrested by the Haryana Police on May 18, after two separate First Information Reports (FIRs) were registered against him at the Rai Police Station in Sonipat, Haryana, over his social media posts in connection with Operation Sindoor. He was released from the Sonipat District Jail on the evening of May 22, a day after the Supreme Court granted him interim bail. Later, the Supreme Court extended his interim bail, stating there would be no impediment to his right to speech and expression. The court, however, directed the professor to not post online anything related to the cases in which he is embroiled.
