Acquittal of MLA Raja over tirade against Prophet seen as legitimising incendiary provocations

The acquittal of Goshamahal MLA T Raja Singh in a case of making derogatory remarks against Prophet Mohammed and Islam by a Special Court for MP/MLA cases courted controversy, particularly over the observation made by the court, which appeared to amount to defending the divisive statements made by Raja Singh, who is notorious for his intemperate utterances.

The case stems from an incendiary ten-minute video posted on August 22, 2022, on his YouTube channel, Sree Ram Channel Telangana, where, in a programme titled “Faruqui K Aaka Ka Ithaas Suniye,” Raja made contentious references to Prophet Mohammed’s marriages, including his marriage to Aisha and to Zaynab following her separation from Zayd, derided the Quran as a “hara kitab” and referred to Muslims through the reductionist epithet “gol topi wale” (wearers of skull-caps).

Raja Singh, an unapologetic purveyor of aggressive Hindutva arguments whose unrestrained tongue has repeatedly brought him into collision with the law, stood trial over inflammatory attacks directed against Prophet Mohammed and the Islamic faith, provoking a backlash in Hyderabad, particularly in the Old City, where protests erupted demanding Singh’s arrest.

Clashes with the police left several people injured, while shops in parts of the Old City pulled down their shutters amid heightened tension, leading to his suspension from the BJP, followed by his 77-day incarceration after he was charged under Sections 153(A), 295(A), 504, 505 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, and eventually implicated in eight cases arising from the episode.

In a detailed order, the court, while highlighting the procedural shortfalls within the prosecution’s submissions, including uncertified translations, uncollected hardware and ruptures in the digital chain of custody, appeared to defend Raja Singh’s invective ridiculing Prophet Mohammed and Islam.

Referring to Sahih Al-Bukhari and Surah Al-Ahzab, the court observed that his statements corresponded with accounts contained in recognised Islamic texts and found the allegation of deliberate and malicious intent to insult unsubstantiated.

The court similarly found the prosecution’s interpretation of “hara kitaab” inconclusive, observing that green-coloured books are commonplace, while reasoning that his “gol topi wale” rhetoric, referring to the practice among Muslims of wearing skull caps, could not, by itself, constitute a sufficient basis for establishing communal targeting.

In delivering its complete exoneration, the court cautioned the police against wasting investigative capital on what it termed frivolous and biased grievances, yet for legal observers and India’s Muslims, the judgment amounts to legitimising an elected representative’s incendiary provocations under the protective aegis of textual technicalities and investigative incompetence.