Critics say the Devendra Fadnavis government shows one rule for Hindu accused and another for innocent Muslims like Faheem Ansari
MUMBAI — As Maharashtra marked the 17th anniversary of the 26/11 attacks, the Devendra Fadnavis government came under sharp criticism for refusing a Police Clearance Certificate (PCC) to Faheem Ansari, a man who was honourably acquitted in the case after years of trial.
The move has raised serious concerns about discrimination against Indian Muslims and the lasting stigma placed on innocent men even after courts clear them.
Faheem Ansari was once accused of helping the terrorists by preparing maps of Mumbai. The trial court rejected the charge, saying such maps were publicly available. The high court and the Supreme Court also upheld his acquittal.
Yet, the Fadnavis government told the Bombay High Court that Faheem will not be given a PCC — meaning he cannot get a government job, cannot work in any municipal body, cannot join private security work, and cannot even obtain the badge needed to drive an auto-rickshaw.
Government lawyer Amit Palkar informed the court that Faheem could do only those tasks “that do not require police verification”. This statement has shocked many, as it openly blocks him from earning a simple and honest living.
Speaking to reporters earlier, Faheem said, “If the courts of India have declared me innocent, why is the police still treating me like a criminal? I only want the right to feed my family with dignity.”
Government Claims ‘Suspicion’
In January, Faheem requested the court to allow him to get an auto-rickshaw badge so that he could earn a livelihood. But in September, the state filed a fresh claim saying intelligence agencies still consider him “suspicious”.
According to Faheem, the government gave him no explanation apart from repeating old allegations that were already dismissed by all courts.
He said, “They are punishing me for something I did not do. This is like kicking a man who is already down. I cannot survive without work.”
The government also asked the court to hold the next hearing in chambers instead of an open courtroom, citing “sensitive information”. The court agreed.
Faheem’s case highlights what many Muslim groups describe as a pattern of suspicion placed on innocent Muslim men, even after full acquittal.
A community leader from Mumbai said, “If a Muslim man is accused of anything, the stain never goes away. Even when the courts remove it, the government keeps it alive.”
Legal experts say the government’s stand amounts to denying the authority of the judiciary.
A retired judge, speaking on condition of anonymity, said, “An acquittal is not a small thing. It is a declaration of innocence. If the state refuses to accept it, the person’s rights are directly harmed.”
What has angered many is the contrast between Faheem’s treatment and the treatment given to some Hindu accused in riot and terror cases.
Activists point to several examples:
• Sadhvi Pragya Thakur, accused in the Malegaon blasts, was given a BJP ticket and made a Member of Parliament.
• Eleven men convicted in the Bilkis Bano gang rape and murder case in Gujarat were released and publicly honoured.
• Swami Aseemanand and Prasad Purohit, accused in the Samjhauta Express, Ajmer and Makkah Masjid blasts, have received strong political backing from right-wing groups.
• People linked to the 2002 Gujarat violence, including Maya Kodnani and Babu Bajrangi, were given political positions or were seen being honoured on stage.
A Muslim activist in Mumbai said, “When the accused are from powerful organisations, they are given respect. But when an innocent Muslim proves his innocence, he is still punished. This is not justice.”
At the heart of the matter is a man who simply wants to earn his bread.
Faheem told a local journalist, “I am not asking for a government post. I only want to drive an auto. Why is the state stopping me from living a normal life?”
He added that he used RTI to ask why his PCC was being blocked. The reply he received said the certificate was withheld because of “possible links to Lashkar-e-Taiba” — the same allegation that the courts already rejected.
The case has now become a test of whether the government will respect the verdict of the courts and treat an acquitted Muslim citizen with fairness.
Civil rights lawyer Aisha Deshmukh said, “If Faheem is still considered guilty after the Supreme Court cleared him, then the justice system loses meaning. Acquittal must bring dignity, not more suffering.”
As Faheem’s petition continues in court, many in Maharashtra — especially Indian Muslims — watch closely, asking whether equality before the law is truly available to all.
