Supreme Court refuses to entertain plea seeking ban on controversial book "Muhammad" authored by Jeetendra Tyagi aka Wasim Rizvi

Read Time: 04 minutes

The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a public interest litigation filed by the Indian Muslim Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat seeking arrest of Jitendra Tyagi, earlier known as Wasim Rizvi and Yati Narsinghanand.

A bench led by CJI UU Lalit stated that the prayer of banning the book authored by Tyagi titled "Muhammad" as well as arrest of persons while surpassing the entire process of undergoing trial, cannot be entertained under Article 32. The plea had also prayed that Tyagi and Yati Narsinghanand be restrained from making 'derogatory, demeaning and incendiary' remarks against Islam, Prophet Mohammed and other icons Islam.

During the hearing, CJI Lalit also enquired whether the petitioner organisation had lodged any complaints at its own behest. The petitioner's lawyer stated that there were multiple complaints lodged against both persons but none at its own behest.

At this juncture, the lawyer sought to take the bench through the controversial book "Muhammad" which allegedly contains anti-islamic content against a revered figure in Islam. However, the bench refused to go further into the plea.

In this light, the petitioner withdrew the plea.

Recently, a video surfaced in which Tyagi has stated that "his life is in danger", expressing apprehensions that he could be killed in a suicide attack by "Muslim fundamentalists". According to PTI, Tyagi has claimed that “minorities in India have more freedom than the majority, so they can speak against Hindu gods and goddesses using Article 19 of the Constitution as a shield”.

Last week, the Supreme Court had ordered Jitendra Tyagi to surrender on or before September 2, 2022, in light of the end of the 3 months of medical bail which was granted to him in a matter pertaining to an investigation into the alleged hate speech at Haridwar Dharam Sansad.

Last year, top court had dismissed Tyagi's petition challenging certain verses of holy Quran by imposing a cost of Rs 50,000 on the petitioner in which he had claimed that 26 verses of the Islamic Holy book attacked non-believers/ civilians.

Case Title: Indian Muslim Shia Isna Ashari Jamaat vs Union of India and ors