A division bench of the Gauhati High Court on Thursday issued notice to Assam chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarma on a series of public interest litigations (PILs) alleging that he made public statements targeting minority communities.
The lead PIL, filed by Assam-based scholar Hirendranath Gohain and two others, said that despite public videos of the chief minister’s alleged hate speeches being available, the Assam Police has not registered a suo motu First Information Report (FIR).
The petitioners had earlier moved the Supreme Court of India with these allegations, but the apex court asked them to approach the High Court (HC) instead.
A bench comprising chief Justice Ashutosh Kumar and justice Arun Dev Choudhury ordered, “Let notices be issued to the Union of India, state of Assam, Director General of Police (DGP) and Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma,” after hearing the petitions.
The court also issued notice on the prayer for interim relief and said the matter would be taken up after the Bihu holidays in April, indicating that at this stage it would first seek responses from the respondents before considering any restraint order.
When the petitioners requested an ad-interim direction restraining the chief minister from making such statements, the bench said, “At this stage, let notices be issued first. It will be a normal restraint while this petition is pending consideration.”
{{/usCountry}}When the petitioners requested an ad-interim direction restraining the chief minister from making such statements, the bench said, “At this stage, let notices be issued first. It will be a normal restraint while this petition is pending consideration.”
{{/usCountry}}The court also said that issuing notice to the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) was not necessary at this stage.
The Chief Justice observed that the statements cited by the petitioners appeared to show a “fissiparous tendency,” adding that the court would examine the respondents’ replies before taking a decision.
The petitioners sought an independent probe into alleged offences under Sections 196 (criminalises promoting enmity, hatred, or ill-will between different groups based on religion, race, language, or caste), 197 (penalises speech, writing, or actions prejudicial to national integration), and 353 (criminalises making, publishing, or circulating false information, rumours, or reports) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), under a commission headed by a former High Court judge to monitor the process, and a declaration that the chief minister violated his constitutional oath.
Senior advocate CU Singh, appearing for Gohain, told the court that the petitioners had approached the High Court with “great anguish,” as the chief minister represents every citizen of the state.
He alleged that since 2023, the CM has been making remarks against “Miya Muslims,” and referred to statements in which the CM allegedly said that “four to five lakh Miya voters” would be deleted from the electoral rolls during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise.
Singh further argued that the CM had used the term “Miya” for Bengali-origin Muslims in a derogatory manner.
Referring to Supreme Court rulings, including the Amish Devgan v. Union of India judgment, Singh said that when hate speech is made by an influential public figure, the police have a duty to register an FIR suo motu and not wait for a complaint.
“We are facing a distressing situation where the head of the State is picking and choosing between the citizens,” he submitted, adding that the petitioners were seeking peace and did not want the state to face unrest.
Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for one of the petitioners, argued that there was a consistent and habitual pattern in the chief minister’s statements.
He said that when a person holding a constitutional office makes such remarks, it becomes more serious and that the CM has violated provisions of the Constitution which speak about secularism.
Referring to a video shared from a BJP handle showing the CM firing at an animated image of two Muslim men, Singhvi called it reprehensible and inexcusable, adding that it remained online for several days and received over a million views before being taken down.
Counsel for the petitioners also highlighted alleged remarks linking floods in Guwahati to a private university in Meghalaya, describing its gates as Mecca-like, and comments on love jihad, unlawful religious conversion, and demographic changes.
It was also submitted that in a 2024 Assembly speech on Mission Basundhara, the CM allegedly said that those forcibly converted during the Mughal period could be considered indigenous if they returned to their “original identity.”
Another submission referred to a speech where the CM allegedly said that Muslims could constitute nearly 40% of the state’s population in the next Census, without supporting data.
After hearing detailed arguments from senior advocates including Abhishek Manu Singhvi, CU Singh, and others, the High Court issued notices to all respondents and listed the batch of cases. The matter is scheduled for further hearing in April, following the Bihu holidays.