Mahmood Madani moves SC against Assam CM over constitutional transgression against Muslims

As Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma seemed obdurate in his remarks against Bengali-speaking Muslims in the state, and urged people to inflict maximum misery on them, Maulana Mahmood Madani, President, Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, requested the Supreme Court, through a petition, to quell the unrestrained exercise of power by those who hold constitutional positions in spreading hatred and divisive acts and who seek shelter behind their position to promote communal hatred, incite public animosity, or vilify any group.

The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind has approached the apex court against a series of recent public statements made by Sarma, terming them communal, deeply divisive, and contrary to the spirit of the Constitution, while contending that such remarks, particularly when issued by a sitting Chief Minister, cannot be trivialised as political rhetoric or shielded under the guarantee of free speech.

The application, filed by Madani through senior advocate M R Shamshad, urges the Supreme Court to frame strict and enforceable guidelines for persons occupying constitutional positions so that public office is not misused to legitimise hatred or target any community.

The application has been filed in a pending petition instituted by the Jamiat, in which the Supreme Court had reserved its order on January 20, and it seeks further directions in light of what the organisation describes as a continuing pattern of public statements that undermine constitutional morality.

According to the plea, statements of this nature amount to a deliberate attempt to stigmatise an entire community, erode social harmony, and violate the dignity and responsibility inherent in constitutional office, while directly assaulting the constitutional values of equality, fraternity, secularism, and human dignity.

The Jamiat has further requested the court to lay down regulatory norms governing the conduct of constitutional functionaries, asserting that such guidelines are essential to reinforce the principle that no individual, regardless of office, stands above the Constitution or the law, which forms the bedrock of the rule of law. It has submitted that remarks encouraging discrimination or hostility cannot enjoy protection under Article 19, particularly when they emanate from those entrusted with safeguarding constitutional order.

The plea follows a series of statements made by Sarma in late January, including remarks on January 27 in which he acknowledged encouraging party workers to file complaints against those he referred to as “Miyas”, stating that the intent was to “trouble” them and compel them to leave the state.

He also claimed that during the Election Commission of India’s ongoing Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, between four and five lakh voters identified as “Miya” would be removed, while asserting that such individuals should not be permitted to vote in Assam.

On January 29, Sarma further escalated his rhetoric by publicly labelling Congress MP Gaurav Gogoi and his wife Elizabeth Colebourn Gogoi as “Pakistani agents”, while challenging them to initiate legal proceedings against him.

The Jamiat has argued that the cumulative effect of these statements reflects a deliberate misuse of constitutional authority, warranting judicial intervention to prevent the normalisation of hate speech by those holding high public office.