SC Most Rightly Grants Relief In Md Zubair Case
Background
Mohammad Zubair, co-founder of fact-checking website Alt News, was arrested by the Delhi Police in June 2022 for an old tweet allegedly hurting religious sentiments.
Multiple FIRs were also filed against him in different states (Uttar Pradesh, Delhi, etc.) on similar allegations.
Zubair approached the Supreme Court, seeking consolidation of all FIRs, quashing of repetitive cases, and relief from continuous harassment.
Supreme Court’s Reasoning
1. Freedom of Speech & Article 19(1)(a)
The SC held that Zubair’s right to free speech cannot be curtailed by registering multiple FIRs for the same set of tweets/posts.
Quoting earlier precedents, the Court stressed that criticism of government or individuals cannot automatically amount to a criminal offence unless it incites violence or public disorder.
2. Abuse of Process of Law
The Court noted that multiple FIRs for the same offence in different states is nothing but harassment.
As per law, once an FIR has been registered, subsequent FIRs on the same cause of action are impermissible.
Hence, the Court directed club all FIRs with the Delhi Police’s Special Cell, which was already investigating.
3. Personal Liberty – Article 21
SC emphasized that bail is the rule and jail is the exception.
In cases of free speech, the State must be extremely cautious before curtailing personal liberty.
Since Zubair had already spent time in custody, continuing detention was held unjustified.
4. Principle of Consolidation
To prevent harassment, SC ordered that all present and future FIRs related to the same tweet be transferred to Delhi Police.
This avoids Zubair being dragged to different states repeatedly.
Key Case Laws Relied Upon
T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala (2001) 6 SCC 181
Held that multiple FIRs on the same cause of action are not maintainable.
Arnab Ranjan Goswami v. Union of India (2020) 14 SCC 12
SC quashed multiple FIRs against a journalist and transferred investigation to Mumbai Police, holding that multiplicity of FIRs amounts to harassment.
Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P. (1994) 4 SCC 260
Reiterated that arrest and detention cannot be mechanical; personal liberty must be protected.
Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (AIR 1962 SC 955)
Clarified limits of free speech; only speech inciting violence can be punished, mere criticism of government/religion is not sedition.
Conclusion of the Judgment
Relief Granted:
Bail was granted to Md. Zubair.
All FIRs were clubbed and transferred to Delhi Police’s Special Cell.
Protection was given against future harassment for the same tweet.
Why it matters:
This judgment reaffirmed free speech as a cornerstone of democracy.
It also reinforced that police powers cannot be used to stifle dissent.
The decision strengthens the principle that multiple FIRs = harassment = abuse of process.
✅ In short, the SC most rightly granted relief in Md. Zubair’s case because it upheld fundamental rights, protected personal liberty, and prevented abuse of criminal process.
RELATED Blog
0 comments