Latest JudgementIndian Evidence Act, 1872Indian Penal Code, 1860
Shaikh Sadique Isaq Qureshi v. State of Maharashtra, 2025
he Court recognized that giving lectures on democratic values like the role of courts and media does not inherently involve criminality unless it is linked to unlawful acts or incitement.
Supreme Court of India·3 April 2025
Judgement Details
Court
Supreme Court of India
Date of Decision
3 April 2025
Judges
Justice MM Sundresh ⦁ Justice Rajesh Bindal
Citation
Acts / Provisions
Section 61 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 121, 122 of Indian Penal Code, 1860
Facts of the Case
- The appellant was implicated in connection with a document known as the "Roadmap", which allegedly outlined a plan to establish a political party and take over various government and law enforcement sectors in India, including the judiciary, police, and army.
- Document’s Objectives: The document outlined a series of stages, which included:
- Stage 1: Establishing connections with other Islamic countries.
- Stage 2: Targeting a particular organization and forming a political party with members from the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, OBC, and Muslims.
- Stage 3: Displaying strength and storing explosives.
- Stage 4: Aiming to take over power, filling key government and military positions, and eliminating opposition.
- Stage 1: Establishing connections with other Islamic countries.
- Contentions: The prosecution presented this document as evidence of a dangerous objective to destabilize the country and to wage war against India. However, the case focused on whether Qureshi had actively supported or propagated the ideas and objectives outlined in the document.
Issues
- Whether there is any evidence which substantiate any claim that Qureshi was part of the criminal activities or the dangerous plans detailed in the Roadmap?
Judgement
- The Court acknowledged that the document outlined extremely dangerous objectives, but focused on whether the appellant Shaikh Sadique Isaq Qureshi was involved in promoting or acting upon these objectives.
- The Court carefully examined the evidence against the appellant. It concluded that there was no evidence showing that Qureshi had acted in furtherance of the document or had propagated its contents.
- One of the witnesses testified that Qureshi had given lectures on the importance of democracy, specifically stating that the country's democracy is dependent on courts, media, and administration. The Court noted that there was nothing wrong with the appellant speaking on these topics and that it was not a call to action or instigation for any unlawful activities.
- The Court found that the appellant was not instigating members to commit any offenses or wage war against India. It noted that the lectures given by the appellant did not contain any incitement to violence or unlawful action.
Held
- The Supreme Court dismissed the charges against Shaikh Sadique Isaq Qureshi, holding that the evidence did not show his active involvement in propagating the dangerous objectives outlined in the Roadmap.
- The Court found that Qureshi’s lectures on the democratic process did not constitute instigation to commit any offenses or actions against the state.
- The Court concluded that there was insufficient evidence to hold Qureshi responsible for the actions described in the Roadmap document, and the appeal was allowed in his favor.
Analysis
- The Court emphasized that evidence must show direct involvement in illegal activities or incitement to commit an offense for an individual to be held criminally liable. In this case, the evidence did not substantiate any claim that Qureshi was part of the criminal activities or the dangerous plans detailed in the Roadmap.
- The lecture testimony was crucial in this case, as it provided insight into Qureshi’s speech and actions. Since there was no evidence linking his lectures to the objectives of the Roadmap, the Court found no criminal intent or action on his part.
- The case also touches on the freedom of speech and expression. The Court recognized that giving lectures on democratic values like the role of courts and media does not inherently involve criminality unless it is linked to unlawful acts or incitement. Qureshi’s lectures were found to be within his rights to express his views, as long as they did not advocate for criminal acts.
- Although the Roadmap document itself contained extremely dangerous objectives, the Court was careful not to overextend its interpretation based on the document alone. It clarified that no criminal liability could be imposed solely based on the existence of a document unless there was proof that an individual actively participated or supported its objectives.