Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, presiding over a plea filed by a local attorney, noted that a lower court had already ordered the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against Ayyub. The judge directed the central government, the Delhi Police, and the social media platform X to "work in tandem" and "do the needful in 24 hours" regarding the posts in question.

"Let the matter be called day after. Action is necessary in view of the highly derogatory, inflammatory and communal tweets by respondent no. 4 (Ayyub), pursuant to which FIR has also been directed against respondent no. 4 by a court of competent jurisdiction," the court stated in its order.

Legal Challenges and Constitutional Rights

The petition was brought forward by Amita Sachdeva, who describes herself as a devout follower of Sanatan Dharm. Sachdeva argued that Ayyub's posts, which date back to 2016 and 2017, insulted Hindu deities and "revered historical figures."

The petitioner stated that she originally sought relief through X's resident grievance officer and the Grievance Appellate Committee. However, the committee reportedly refused to act, citing the fact that the matter was already under judicial review.

According to the plea, the continued visibility of the tweets constitutes a persistent injury to Sachdeva's religious sentiments and infringes upon her fundamental rights under Article 21 (Right to Life and Liberty) and Article 25 (Freedom of Religion) of the Constitution.

History of the Case

In response to the petition, the High Court issued formal notices to the Centre, Ayyub, and X, while also impleading the Delhi Police as a necessary party to the proceedings.

The legal pressure on Ayyub intensified in January 2025, when a magisterial court determined that her social media activity prima facie disclosed several cognizable offences. That court's January 25, 2025, order alleged the posts included "insults to Hindu deities, spreading of anti-India sentiment and incitement of religious disharmony."

"From the facts of the case, prima facie cognisable offences are made out under sections 153 A (punishment for promoting enmity between different groups on the ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc), 295 A (deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs) and 505 (statements conducing public mischief) of the IPC," the magisterial court wrote.

The High Court is scheduled to revisit the matter in 48 hours to assess whether the directives for content removal have been executed.

With inputs from PTI