In a notable case, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has granted bail to Faisal Khan under unique conditions after he was arrested for making anti-national statements. Faisal, who operates a puncture repair shop in Misrod near Bhopal, had been filmed chanting slogans in favour of Pakistan and against India, which led to widespread outrage and protests.
Court conditions for bail
The Jabalpur High Court presided over by Justice Dinesh Kumar Paliwal, stipulated that Faisal must perform a public display of patriotism. He is required to salute the national flag 21 times and shout "Bharat Mata Ki Jai" twice a month. This must take place at the flagpole in front of the Misrod police station on the first and fourth Tuesdays of every month until the conclusion of his case.
Background of the incident
The controversy began on May 17, 2024, when a video surfaced showing Faisal shouting slogans that included "Pakistan Zindabad" and "Bharat Murdaabad." His actions sparked protests from groups like the Bajrang Dal, who demanded his arrest. The police subsequently charged him under Section 153(B) of the Indian Penal Code, which addresses incitement to public disorder.
Faisal's Statement
In a recent interview, Faisal expressed his deep affection for India, stating, "My Hindustan is, and will always be, Zindabad; Pakistan Murdaabad." He explained that his actions were a result of a misunderstanding and that he was inebriated during the incident. "I was joking, not fully aware of what I was saying. I didn't anticipate the repercussions," he said.
Faisal, who claims to be illiterate and uneducated, acknowledged that he regretted his remarks and promised not to repeat such mistakes. "I will come every Tuesday between 10 AM and 12 PM to salute the flag. I love my country and will abide by the law," he added.
Legal proceedings
The prosecution argued that Faisal's slogans posed a threat to national unity and public order, while the defence claimed he was wrongfully accused. Despite his prior offences, including 12 other criminal cases, the court considered both sides before deciding to grant bail under specific conditions aimed at promoting a sense of national responsibility.
The case highlights the delicate balance between individual freedom of expression and the collective sentiments surrounding national integrity, showcasing the judiciary's role in addressing such issues.
