Delhi High Court rejects suit seeking ban on Waseem Rizvi's book on Prophet Mohammed

The Delhi High Court has rejected a suit seeking ban on Waseem Rizvi’s self-published book titled “Muhammad”, on the grounds of maintainability (Qamar Hasnain v Syed Waseem Rizvi and Ors)..Rizvi, who recently converted to Hinduism and now refers to himself Jitendra Narayan Singh Tyagi, is the former member and chairman of Central Shia Waqf Board of Uttar Pradesh. He recently wrote and self-published a book on Prophet Mohammed.The plaint was filed by a man named Qamar Hasnain who claimed to be Shia religious scholar. He alleged that book contained several passages against Islam, Quran and the Prophet himself and is therefore damaging to communal peace and harmony. He added that contents of book are offensive, hateful and distressing to even a casual reader let alone a follower of Islam and therefore Rizvi is not protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution..Single-judge Justice Sanjeev Narula however noted that the suit lacked foundation since the relief sought were representative and not in personam.The Court further noted that to maintain the present suit, there had to be personal legal right, personal legal injury and an actual or legal damage to the petitioner which was not the case as the remarks were against his religion. The bench said that, at best, a case may have been made under the criminal law which has not been pleaded here..It said that though vague references were made to an Allahabad High Court judgment of 1918 and Law Commission report on hate speeches but this was of no consequence while the judgment could not be produced before the Court.“Though the fulcrum of the Plaintiff’s argument centres around the reasonable restrictions to the Defendant’s right of freedom of speech and expression, these are arguments on merits, and once the jurisdiction of this Court is ousted, the same cannot be examined by this Court in the present proceedings,” said the order..Justice Narula added that no provision of law could be shown to it to maintain the petition and therefore, it is liable to be rejected.“In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that in the absence of disclosure of infringement of any legal right, the Plaintiff’s prayer seeking injunction and damages on account of being offended or aggrieved by the contents of a book – which allegedly is hurtful to his religious sentiments – would not give him any right to approach this Court by way of the present suit. No other provision under law has been shown to the Court which can come to the assistance of the Plaintiff to maintain the present suit, and accordingly, it is held that the present suit is not maintainable. The plaint is liable to be rejected," the Court ordered.The Court, however, said that while the suit has been deemed as not maintainable, it has not gone into the contents of the book and the plaintiff is entitled to exercise his rights and rights under the law..While advocates Farrukh Khan, Ateendra Singh and Baasir Aziz appeared for the plaintiff, senior advocate Sajan Poovayya, along with advocates Saransh Jain, Shloka N, Shaurya R Rai, Raksha Aggarwal, PS Kharola, Sourabh Tandon and Sharan Balakrishna appeared for the defendants..[Read Order]