A special court in Uttar Pradesh on Friday acquitted former state minister Azam Khan in a case accusing him of spreading enmity, misusing an official letterhead, and making defamatory remarks against the BJP, the RSS, and prominent Shia cleric Maulana Syed Kalbe Jawad Naqvi.
Delivering the verdict, Special ACJM (MP/MLA Court) Alok Verma said the prosecution failed to provide enough evidence to support the charges and noted that the case was barred by limitation. The court pointed out that the alleged incident took place in 2014, but the FIR was filed five years later in 2019, making it time-barred under Section 468 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
The defence also argued that the complaint was not filed by an aggrieved person. It was lodged by Allama Amir Naqvi on behalf of Maulana Kalbe Jawad, who, according to the court, had not suffered any defamation himself. Referring to Section 199 of the CrPC, the judge said that only the person directly affected, or someone legally authorised on their behalf, can file a defamation case.
The court further noted that the alleged press release, which was said to be central to the case, was neither submitted in the official record nor mentioned in the investigation diary. “After considering all aspects, the court is of the opinion that the charges against accused Azam Khan have not been proven beyond doubt. Hence, he deserves to be acquitted,” the judgment stated.
According to the prosecution, the FIR filed at Hazratganj Police Station on February 1, 2019, accused Khan of using his position as a minister to issue defamatory material against the BJP, RSS, and Maulana Naqvi, allegedly damaging their reputation nationally and internationally. The complaint also claimed that the case had initially been suppressed under government pressure.
After the verdict, Azam Khan expressed relief and gratitude. “The decision is very honest. I can only pray for the judge and thank him,” he told reporters. Commenting on the broader justice system, he added, “On law and order, I will only say that only ‘order’ has remained. The law should continue to exist in the form of justice as it has happened today.”
