'Opposing Babri Masjid Demolition Is Not Anti-National': Bombay HC Quashes Externment Of 2 SDPI Leaders
The Bombay High Court quashed the externment of two SDPI leaders, ruling that the action failed to meet legal requirements under the Maharashtra Police Act. The Court observed that opposing the Babri Masjid demolition cannot by itself be treated as anti-national and questioned the alleged selective targeting of the petitioners.

The Bombay High Court quashed the externment of two SDPI leaders, holding that opposition to the Babri Masjid demolition cannot by itself be considered anti-national | AI Generated Image
Mumbai, July 29, 2026: The Bombay High Court has quashed externment orders issued against two functionaries of the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI), holding that the action was legally unsustainable and raising serious concerns over selective targeting based on religion.
Justice Madhav Jamdar, while hearing petitions filed by Firoz Abdul Wahab Khan and Mohammad Rafiq Gulam Rasul Ansari, orally observed that merely expressing the opinion that the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya should not have been demolished cannot be considered anti-national.
The Court also questioned why action had been taken only against the two Muslim petitioners when workers from other political parties had participated in the same protests, Bar & Bench reported.
Selective Action Under Scanner
The petitioners had challenged externment orders dated Dec. 3, 2025, issued by the Mumbai Police, which barred them from entering Mumbai for one year. The orders were based on three FIRs registered in 2024 and 2025 in connection with protests over the Waqf Bill, air pollution caused by cement godowns in the Chembur-Govandi area and the Babri Masjid issue.
During the hearing, Justice Jamdar noted that the FIRs were registered against members of several political parties, yet only the two petitioners had been externed.
"FIR is against all political parties, but these petitioners are singled out. Action can't be taken selectively. Have you taken action against the political workers of the Congress party, against the Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) faction? Just because they belong to one religion, action is taken?" the judge orally remarked.
Appearing for the petitioners, advocate Ibraheem Harbat argued that none of the allegations met the requirements of Section 56 of the Maharashtra Police Act, which permits externment only when there is material to show a likelihood of offences causing danger to persons or property. The Court observed that the FIRs referred only to sloganeering and did not allege any damage to persons or public property.
Court Defends Right To Dissent
The Court also questioned the reliance placed on protests relating to the Babri Masjid issue. Justice Jamdar orally observed that holding the view that the mosque should not have been demolished is a matter of personal perception and cannot be treated as anti-national.
"According to them, Babri Masjid should not have been demolished, that is their perception! How is it anti-national? That cannot be anti-national! That is their perception! Everybody has got right," the judge remarked.
Chief Public Prosecutor Shishir Hiray referred to alleged links between the petitioners and the banned Popular Front of India (PFI), an allegation denied by the petitioners.
However, the Court noted that these allegations did not form part of the show-cause notice and, therefore, could not be relied upon while defending the externment orders.
Hiray also argued that the petitioners' conduct during protests could lead to social disharmony and breaches of peace. The Court, however, observed that fundamental rights cannot be curtailed on the basis of speculative apprehensions.
"As far as fundamental rights are concerned, no reading between the lines! Fundamental rights are there! How can fundamental rights of citizens be affected like this?" the judge said.
Externment Orders Quashed
Reiterating that externment is an extraordinary measure affecting a citizen's fundamental right to free movement, the Court said such action must strictly comply with the law. It also noted that offences still under investigation cannot be used as the basis for externment.
Also Watch:
ALSO READ
Referring to an earlier order granting similar relief to another SDPI functionary, Justice Jamdar observed that such action cannot rest solely on opposition to government decisions. Holding that the externment orders in the present case did not satisfy the legal requirements, the Court quashed them.
To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/
RECENT STORIES
-
'NDA Government Stands Firmly With Students': Fadnavis After Lok Sabha Passes Anti-Paper Leak Bill -
'Rushing Me Into An Ambulance & Taking...': Rubina Dilaik Loses Consciousness During Khatron Ke... -
'Opposing Babri Masjid Demolition Is Not Anti-National': Bombay HC Quashes Externment Of 2 SDPI... -
CWG 2026: India Confirms 9th Boxing Medal As Indian boxer Narender Berwal Qualifies To 90kg... -
Metro Masterplan To Transform Indore, 4 TOD Clusters Proposed In 31 KM Stretch
