For over three decades, the septuagenarian from Uttar Pradesh carried a label that outlived witnesses, investigating officers, and even his co-accused
LUCKNOW — For 33 years, Mohammed Naeem carried a label that outlived witnesses, investigating officers, and even his co-accused. On Thursday, a court finally took it away.
A Special NIA Court in Lucknow acquitted the 76-year-old resident of Ismailpur, Gorakhpur, of all charges in a 1993 sedition case, ruling that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt and could not produce a shred of crucial evidence linking him to the alleged crime.
Additional District and Sessions Judge and Special Judge (NIA) Umakant Jindal delivered the judgment on July 31, bringing to an end a prosecution that had lasted nearly half of Naeem’s life.
Naeem had been facing trial under three stringent provisions of the Indian Penal Code — Section 124A, 295A (outraging religious feelings), and 153B (imputations prejudicial to national integration: Sedition).
The case dates back to Republic Day, January 26, 1993 — just seven weeks after the demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya had left the country on edge, and eastern Uttar Pradesh simmering with communal tension.
According to the FIR registered at Kotwali Police Station, Gorakhpur, Kotwali Inspector Pawan Kumar Singh and his team were on patrol in Ismailpur when they allegedly saw a group of men hoisting black flags and shouting slogans like “Pakistan Zindabad” and “Republic Day Murdabad.”
Police further alleged that the group made provocative speeches referring to the Babri Masjid demolition, called for “another Pakistan” inside India, and made statements intended to incite communal hatred. The police claimed the men fled before they could be caught, leaving behind four black flags, which were said to have been seized from the spot.
On that basis, Naeem, along with Mohammad Yusuf, Ataullah and others, was named as an accused.
A Case Full of Holes
What followed was a masterclass in how not to investigate a case, the court observed.
In its acquittal order, the court flagged serious procedural and evidentiary lapses:
1. No recovery, no proof: The four black flags that formed the core of the prosecution’s case were never produced before the court. No proper seizure memo was filed to prove they were ever recovered.
2. Witnesses contradicted themselves: Constable Durvijay Singh, a key prosecution witness, admitted during cross-examination that the crowd allegedly raising slogans had already fled by the time the police party reached the spot — raising the obvious question of how anyone was identified.
3. Complainant never appeared: Inspector Pawan Kumar Singh, the complainant and the first person to allegedly witness the incident, was never produced for cross-examination despite repeated opportunities given to the prosecution.
4. Investigation on autopilot: The second investigating officer admitted in court that he had never visited the place of occurrence, never recorded any fresh witness statements, and had filed the chargesheet in 2005 solely on the basis of papers collected by his predecessor.
In fact, according to defence counsel Rahul Sonkar, the first investigating officer had himself filed a closure report in 2003, stating there was insufficient evidence to prosecute. That report was not accepted, and two years later, a second officer filed a chargesheet without collecting any new evidence.
The court also noted that not a single independent witness was produced to connect Naeem to the incident.
During the long pendency of the trial, co-accused Mohammad Yusuf and Ataullah died. Naeem remained the sole surviving accused to face trial.
The court acquitted Naeem of all charges, cancelled his bail bonds, and directed that the statutory bond under Section 437A CrPC remain in force for six months.
‘I Feel Vindicated’
After the verdict, an emotional Naeem spoke briefly.
“Now I hope people will stop calling me anti-national. For 33 years, I kept telling everyone that I am innocent, that I had been falsely implicated. Today, I feel vindicated,” he was quoted as saying by The Times of India.
For Naeem, who was in his early 40s when the FIR was lodged and is now a septuagenarian, the acquittal comes after a lifetime of court dates, lawyer fees, and social stigma — the quiet, corrosive cost of a sedition trial that ultimately collapsed for want of evidence.
