Delhi Lt Governor VK Saxena has granted approval for the prosecution of author Arundhati Roy and former Kashmiri professor Sheikh Showkat Hussain in connection with a 2010 case involving alleged provocative speeches, as confirmed by Raj Niwas officials on Tuesday (10 October).

The FIR against Roy and Dr Hussain was initiated following the directives of the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi, according to officials quoted by the Indian Express.

“LG V K Saxena observed that, on the face of it, a case is established against Roy and Dr. Hussain, former Professor of International Law at Central University of Kashmir, under sections 153A (promoting enmity between different groups based on religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and engaging in acts prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony), 153B (imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration), and 505 (statements conducing to public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code, related to their speeches at a public event in the national capital,” stated a Raj Niwas official.

As per Section 196(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), a valid prosecution sanction from the state government is mandatory for certain offenses, including hate speech, offenses hurting religious sentiments, hate crimes, sedition, waging war against the state, and promoting enmity, among others.

The two other accused individuals, Kashmiri separatist leader Sayed Ali Shah Geelani and Delhi University lecturer Syed Abdul Rahman Geelani (acquitted by the Supreme Court in the Parliament attack case on technical grounds) passed away during the course of the case.

Social activist Sushil Pandit from Kashmir filed a complaint on 28 October 2010, with the Tilak Marg Station House Officer, accusing various individuals and speakers, including Roy and Dr Hussain, of delivering “provocative speeches” in public during a conference organised by the ‘Committee for the Release of Political Prisoners (CRPP) under the banner of “Azadi – The Only Way” on 21 October.

The complainant alleged that the discussions advocated the “Separation of Kashmir from India” and that the speeches were provocative, posing a threat to public peace and security.