How 'Sar Tan Se Juda' Case Against Ajmer Cleric, 5 Others Fell Flat in Court

An Ajmer court has acquitted a Muslim cleric and 5 others who were accused of shouting 'Sar Tan Se Juda' slogans.

In June 2022, a Dargah Khadim (worker) in Ajmer, Gauhar Hussain alias Gauhar Chishti, found himself embroiled in a huge controversy, over allegations of chanting 'Sar Tan Se Juda' ('Remove head from body') slogans. Two years later, a district court has acquitted him in the case.

Along with Chishti, there are five others in the case namely — Fakhar Jamali, Tazim Siddiqui, Riyaz Hasan, Moin Khan and Nasir Khan — who have also been acquitted by the court as the prosecution failed to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Additional Sessions and Court Judge Ritu Meena observed that the evidence presented did not support the prosecution's claims of the accused threatening or inciting harm to any specific individual.

The court stated, "prosecution has been unable to prove their case beyond doubt that they had called on any assembly with the intention to incite violence."

Chishti is a Khadim or a worker at the 13th-century Sufi saint Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti’s shrine.

In June 2022, former spokesperson of the BJP, Nupur Sharma stirred a controversy after she made offensive remarks against Prophet Mohammad on a televised debate. Shortly after, protests ensued in other parts of the country.

One of those places where the protests took place was Ajmer where the authorities had given permission for a silent procession to protest against Sharma's comments. Chishti was then accused of raising objectionable slogans during his speech at the dargah’s Nizam Gate.

This FIR was filed on the basis of a complaint by a constable Jayanarayan who had claimed that at around 3 PM on 17 June 2022, provocative slogans such as these were raised at that time: "Gastuakh-e-Nabi ki ek hi saza, sar tan se juda, sar tan se juda." (Only one punishment for insulting the Prophet, off with their heads).

Now, two years later, the court has acquitted Chishti and five others under IPC sections 143 and 149 (unlawful assembly), 115 (abetment of offence punishable with death or life imprisonment)117 (abetting commission of offence by the public or by more than ten persons), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace) and 506 (criminal intimidation).

Moreover, the prosecution used video clips of Chishti's speech to establish a link that it had led to the beheading of Kanhaiya Lal in Udaipur as well as a pharmacist, Umesh Kolhe, at Amravati in Maharashtra.

But what did the court observe?

'Prosecution's Story Doubtful, Important Witness Not Included'

Around 22 witnesses and 32 documents were produced in the court during the trial which lasted two years.

The court pointed out that Jayanarayan had recorded the alleged incident on his mobile phone on 17 June 2022, but he filed the complaint on 25 June — a week later.

Moreover, the complainant's mobile wasn't seized. The court observed that this delay makes the "prosecution's account doubtful."

As per the Amravati and Udaipur case, the court stated that Chishti and others have "neither been accused of committing murder, nor have they been accused of abetting them to commit murder."

It must be noted that he court said that it has been proved from the statements of the investigating officer Banwari Lal himself that the accused are not considered to be involved in those incidents.

Here are some more key observations by the court:

• In this case, the approval for the silent procession was given by SM Akbar and Mohammad Alimuddin but they have not been interrogated during the investigation, nor have they been included as witnesses or accused.

• The Court cast doubts over the veracity of the video clippings, that the prosecution presented only selected clippings from a video CD rather than the entire incident footage. Hence, it was impossible to conclude from these brief clippings what specific speeches or slogans were directed at any particular individual.

• The court also pointed out discrepancies in the DVRs (digital video recording). Right from no sound in the DVR to Jayanarayan first claiming that the CD came from his computer and then stating it was done from the police station's computer while it was another officer-in-charge of that computer during that time period.

• The court also concluded that the evidence of the said witnesses also revealed that the procession was about to start from Nizam gate itself and the sloganeering by the accused was done even before the procession began. Later, the procession reached Collectorate Ajmer peacefully and no untoward incident took place during that time, the court added.

"The prosecution claimed they raised slogans like 'sar tan se juda' but there was no statement or anything to establish in the report that the slogans raised by the accused to incite violence or that they provoked people to raise such slogans or incite violence," the court noted.

Therefore, the court rejected the prosecution's assertions and allegations and found them not guilty of neither raising the slogans, causing harm, nor instigating others to do so.

On the other hand, Public prosecutor Ghulam Nazami Farooqui will reportedly move to High Court against this verdict.