Gurugram court rejects bail plea of Jamia shooter accused of delivering hate speeches at Haryana Mahapanchayat

Read Order: State v. Rambhagat Gopal Sharma  

Pankaj Bajpai

Gurugram, July 17, 2021: Observing that hate speech lays the groundwork for subsequent broader attacks including ostracism and genocide, a Gurugram court has rejected the bail plea of Ram Bhagat Gopal, accused of delivering inflammatory and communal speeches at a Mahapanchayat in Haryana.

Gopal had earlier gained infamy when he had opened fire at protesters against the contentious Citizenship Amendment Act at Delhi’s Jamia Millia Islamia University last year.

In a strongly worded order, Judicial Magistrate Mohammad Sageer said people who give such communally charged speeches and create disharmony are more harmful to the country than the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Hate speech based on religion or caste has become fashion nowadays. The police also seems to be helpless of dealing with such incidents. These kinds of activities are actually disturbing the secular fabric of our Country and killing the spirit of the Constitution of India. It creates tensions and sense of insecurity in the minds of common public which is not a good sign for healthy Democratic Society,” the court said.

“Peace is the essence and sine qua non for development and civilized society. Peace has been and is the aim of our constitution and penal laws. Anyone who is threat to the peace of the society and particularly to the religious harmony, cannot be allowed to roam freely,” the JM further said in the order dated July 15, 2021.

The accused Gopal was arrested after he participated in an event and allegedly gave hate speeches targeting a particular religious community and used inflammatory language to instigate the mob to abduct girls of the particular community and to kill persons of that community.

Although Gopal was earlier granted bail in one of the matters due to his young age, the concession given by the courts on the basis of the fact that he was a minor was not taken in good sense, said the Court. 

JM Sageer observed that the applicant took the concession given to him in wrong perspective as if he can do anything even to destroy the very fundamental feature of the constitution, which he said in his hate speech as ‘secularism’. 

“Rather it seems that he has taken the concession in wrong perspective that he can do anything even to destroy the very fundamental feature of the constitution which we called ‘secularism’ by his hate speech and also that there is no force to stop him as if he is protected by some indefeasible forces and the Rule of Law does not exist in our country,” the court observed.

“He has posed a real threat by his act that he will do whatever he wishes, what will the forces responsible for maintaining law, order and peace would do? He also posed a question to the state and to the courts of law whether it has power to uphold the Rule of Law?” it added.

On the basis of information given by the IO and admitted by the counsels of the accused, the Court found that the applicant was the same person who promulgated and actively participated in opening fire towards the students of one Central university of Delhi.

Observing that the defense tried to mislead the court because the accused himself had admitted his presence while giving inflammatory speech in the video recording at the time of occurrence of the incident, the Court dismissed the bail plea and said that such act of the accused can also lead to destruction of society. 

Terming the act of the accused as an “obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit”, the court said if such kind of persons are allowed to move freely and to indulge in such kind of activities, the very existence of communal harmony may be disturbed and that will give a wrong message that this type of acts are acceptable in society.