New Delhi: Zafar Ali, the chairperson of the managing committee of the Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal, was arrested on Sunday (March 23) in a case related to alleged criminal conspiracy behind the violence that broke out during a controversial survey of the mosque in November last year.
A legal source close to Ali – himself an advocate – alleged that Ali was arrested on March 23 – exactly four months after the violent incident of November 24, 2024 – to prevent him from appearing before a judicial commission in Lucknow and testify. Before being placed under arrest, Ali was summoned for questioning by police two days in a row.
Ali’s brother Tahir Ali told reporters that police arrested him to prevent him from giving his statement to the judicial commission, which had issued him summons.
‘Police don’t want him to go and give his statement before the judicial commission’
“Police don’t want him to go and give his statement before the commission. To stop him from appealing before the judicial commission, police carried out this unconstitutional act” said Tahir Ali.
Announcing Zafar Ali’s arrest, Sambhal Superintendent of Police Krishan Bishnoi said Ali was arrested in connection with the FIR lodged for “criminal conspiracy”. Zia-ur-Rehman Barq , the Sambhal MP from Samajwadi Party was accused in the same FIR of allegedly instigating the mob through a speech delivered by him a few days before the incident, soon after the administration led by a court-appointed advocate commissioner carried out a hurried survey of the Masjid on the directions of a local civil judge.
The court had on November 19, 2024 ordered a survey of the mosque after taking cognisance of an application by some Hindu activists who filed a suit claiming that the Islamic religious site built during the time of Emperor Babur was originally a prominent Hindu temple dedicated to the prophesied avatar of Vishnu, Kalki. Suhail Iqbal, son of SP MLA Iqbal Mehmood, was also accused of instigating the mob.
Ali was not named in the FIR and was, till now, not named as a suspect or accused, although a day after the November incident he was summoned for questioning by police after he alleged in public that he saw policemen firing at the crowd. Five Muslim men were killed in the violence.
While their families alleged that they were shot at by the police, the administration denied the allegations and maintained that the police did not fire any lethal weapons and only used tear gas, lathi-charge and rubber pellet guns to disperse the crowd.
As he was being taken away by police on Sunday, Ali maintained his defiant stand. He said he was being falsely implicated because he had “exposed the police.”
“They were the ones who killed those boys. They murdered the boys,” Ali told mediapersons while being escorted to a police vehicle.
The original FIR for conspiracy lodged against MP Barq invoked charges of rioting, rioting armed with deadly weapon, voluntarily obstructing public servant in the discharge of public functions, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of duty, promoting enmity between different groups, mischief, disobeying a lawful order and other sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
Relevant sections of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act were also included in the FIR. All of these charges have a jail term of less than seven years, making the accused liable for bail.
MP Barq was granted protection from arrest in the case by the Allahabad High Court in January, which, however, rejected his plea to quash the FIR against him. While announcing Ali’s arrest, Sambhal district police chief Bishnoi quoted two additional sections of BNS (230 and 231) against him. These two sections deal with giving or fabricating false evidence intending to cause someone’s conviction with capital punishment or life imprisonment. In other words, both these sections provide for a punishment of more than seven years.
Additional charges invoked to ensure Ali’s arrest
A lawyer associated with Ali said that since MP Barq had already got a stay from arrest for the charges in the original FIR, the additional charges were invoked to ensure Ali’s arrest. This means he would have to seek bail from a sessions judge.
“Barq got relief from the High Court. This would have led to the same cause of action in the case. So they added two more sections,” said the lawyer.
The police are yet to state the specific role allegedly played by Zafar Ali in the conspiracy.
Ali’s associates were puzzled by his arrest. Amir Hussain, an advocate, said that Ali had only conducted a press conference a day after the violence, and not before, in which he accused the police of shooting at the crowd.
“It (press conference) was in the full notice of the administration, which also provided him with a helmet,” said Hussain.
Another lawyer close to Ali wondered that since no additional violence had taken place after November 25, on what basis did the police charge Ali.
On November 25, Ali, while addressing the media, had alleged that he saw the police firing. “I saw that the police were firing bullets. It happened right in front of me. There was no bullet fired from the public in my presence,” Ali said, further alleging that the police personnel were carrying country-made weapons and that they also vandalised and torched their own vehicles parked near the mosque. Sambhal police and administration had denied his allegations, calling them “politically-motivated” and “misleading.”
