The Allahabad High Court recently denied bail to a 62-year-old man, Ansar Ahmed Siddique, accused of sharing a Facebook post containing the slogan "Pakistan Zindabad". Justice Siddharth, presiding over the case, stated that the judiciary's tolerance towards matters with anti-national overtones is contributing to a rise in the number of such cases. The court emphasized that the accused's actions were disrespectful to the Constitution and challenged India's sovereignty, thereby adversely affecting the unity and integrity of the nation.

The court observed that such offenses are becoming increasingly common due to a perceived leniency within the judicial system towards individuals with "anti-national bent of mind". Justice Siddharth explicitly said, "Commission of such offences is becoming a routine affair in this country because the courts are liberal and tolerant towards such acts of people with an anti national bent of mind. It is not a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail at this stage".

In its order on June 26, 2025, the court highlighted the duties of citizens as enshrined in Article 51-A(a) of the Constitution, which mandates abiding by the Constitution, respecting its ideals and institutions, the National Flag, and the National Anthem. Furthermore, sub-clause (c) of the same article obligates citizens to uphold and protect the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India. The court found that Siddique's actions directly contravened these fundamental duties.

According to the First Information Report (FIR), Siddique's Facebook post appealed for "propagating jihad," featured the "Pakistan Zindabad" slogan, and urged Muslims to support their "Pakistani brothers". The prosecution argued that the post hurt national sentiments and militated against the sovereignty and integrity of India. The court concurred, stating that the "anti-social and anti Indian post" harmed the unity and integrity of the country.

The defense counsel argued that Siddique was a 62-year-old man undergoing medical treatment. However, the court rejected this argument, asserting that Siddique's age indicated he was born in independent India, and his "irresponsible and anti-national conduct" did not entitle him to protection under Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to liberty. The court clarified that while denying bail, the trial against Siddique should be concluded as expeditiously as possible.

This ruling underscores the Allahabad High Court's strong stance against acts perceived as anti-national, particularly those disseminated through social media platforms. The court's observations regarding judicial tolerance and the increasing frequency of such offenses raise important questions about the balance between freedom of expression and the need to safeguard national unity and integrity. The decision serves as a reminder of the constitutional duties of citizens and the potential consequences of engaging in activities that undermine the nation's fundamental values.