Along with Indian Babudom, the Indian judiciary is probably the most corrupt institutions that is least bothered about national security. Both these institutions are also highly Hinduphobic (Hindudveshi) while bending over backwards to display their secularism and minority appeasement skills. Additionally, they have mastered the art of protecting their own who are neck-deep in corruption. Indian judiciary also repeatedly interferes in the functioning of the parliament acting as unelected tyrants without accountability. Their
Mumbai HC’s atrocious rulings
The Mumbai (Bombay) High Court (HC) has taken up the task of being as anti-national as possible and throwing national security out of the window. Three such recent rulings show where their loyalties lie and why we need to demand more accountability from the Indian judiciary.
The first case pertains to engineering student Khadija Shaikh who had put up a social media post criticizing Operation Sindoor and supporting Pakistan. However, the Mumbai HC opined that the Maharashtra government was ‘ruining’ her future by acting against her and arresting her. It also questioned the institution’s rustication of Shaikh.
On 26 May, the Bombay High Court strongly criticized the Maharashtra government for arresting and rusticating a 19-year-old engineering student, Shaikh, over a social media post critical of Operation Sindoor. Shaikh, a second-year student at Sinhgad Academy of Engineering in Pune, had reposted content on Instagram that described Bharat’s counter-terror strikes as fascist and praised the Two-Nation Theory, while dismissing Bharat’s right to self-defense and referring to Jammu and Kashmir as “Occupied Kashmir.” The post also portrayed slain Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad terrorists as “innocent” victims of a “Hindutva regime.”
Although she deleted the post within two hours, Shaikh faced online threats and was arrested on 9 May. Her college subsequently rusticated her without a hearing. She was incarcerated in Yerwada Central Prison during her semester examinations.
Hearing her petition, Justice Gauri Godse of the Bombay High Court delivered a scathing rebuke to both the government and the college. “You are ruining the life of a student,” she said, questioning how the institution could rusticate a student without even seeking an explanation. Advocate Farhana Shah, appearing for Shaikh, emphasized the urgent need for relief as her exams were ongoing. The college’s offer to allow her to appear for exams under police escort was flatly rejected by the court, which declared, “She is not a criminal.”
Justice Godse underscored the true purpose of education, stating, “Is the role of an educational institution merely academic instruction, or is it also to reform and guide young minds? Do you want to create a student or a criminal?” The court ordered Shaikh’s immediate release and directed that she be allowed to appear for her remaining exams without any form of intimidation or surveillance. “She cannot be asked to appear with police around her,” the judge asserted. The bench also permitted conversion of the matter into a criminal writ or the filing of a fresh petition if required.
So according to Indian judiciary, speaking the language of the enemy nation and supporting terrorism are par for the course. The case has ignited broader questions on the balance between national security, freedom of expression, and the responsibilities of educational institutions. The Bombay HC may think she isn’t a criminal but we might recall Ishrat Jahan who was also a ‘student’ and turned out to be a terrorist asset.
The second case concerns a Yemeni refugee who was detained by the Byculla Police Station. On Tuesday, the Bombay High Court ordered the immediate release of Yemeni national Mohammed Qassim Mohammed Al Shibah, who had been detained by Mumbai Police since 16 May for overstaying his visa. The court strongly questioned the legality of his detention at Byculla police station without any formal order and emphasized that such administrative lapses could not justify prolonged custody. It also expressed concern about the consequences of keeping a person in lock-up without due process, particularly in the event of a medical emergency.
Al Shibah, a former Yemen Airlines employee and a UNHRC-designated refugee, had been living in India with his family since their visas expired in 2015. Deportation orders were issued against six family members, including three minors. Advocate Wesley Menezes, representing Al Shibah, stated that his client has no criminal record apart from the overstay and is seeking legal resettlement in Canada—a process expected to take another year. He stressed that Al Shibah poses no threat to public order.
In response, Additional Public Prosecutor Poornima Kantharia opposed the plea, citing the visa overstay and the fact that Al Shibah was operating a business in India. However, the court acknowledged that Al Shibah had originally entered India on valid documents and that his current situation arose due to bureaucratic shortcomings.
Here it would be in order to remind the HC that the apex court had remarked that Bharat was no Dharmshala. However, for the Indian judiciary political correctness and secularism are more important than national which is evident from the relief provided by the Bombay HC to Turkish firm Celebi.
The Bombay High Court has granted interim relief to Turkish ground handler Celebi by halting Mumbai International Airport Limited (MIAL) from awarding new contracts for ground and bridge handling services. The court’s directive came after Celebi challenged the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security’s (BCAS) recent revocation of its security clearance, citing national security concerns—an action linked to Turkey’s support for Pakistan following Bharat’s Operation Sindoor. This move led to the termination of Celebi’s contracts at major Bharatiya airports, including Mumbai and Delhi.
Celebi Nas Airport Services India, which holds a 59% stake in its Mumbai joint venture, filed three petitions arguing the BCAS decision and MIAL’s termination were arbitrary and lacked legal basis. The company has sought reinstatement of its terminated agreements and a stay on MIAL’s new tender process initiated on 17 May. Celebi’s sister firms have filed similar pleas in the Delhi High Court, seeking parallel relief. The company has relied on Indian judiciary’s track record and has come up triumph, at least for now.
Is Indian judiciary turning into the saviour of criminals, anti-nationals & terrorists?
It will be in order to see some of the gems of Indian judiciary that encourages anti-nationals:
We have seen the Indian judiciary act as a parallel government numerous times in what is aptly termed as the tyranny of the unelected. They have overturned or stalled important government decisions. It makes us wonder if the Indian judiciary is a handmaiden of George Soros!
Indian Judiciary is probably the only judiciary in the world that opens its doors at midnight for a convicted terrorist. A late night hearing was held for 1993 Mumbai blast convict Yakub Memon in 2015. It is an apt reminder of how the Indian judiciary is a slave of the Khan Market gang and opens its doors for them at odd hours while several undertrials don’t even get a hearing for years.
The lesser said about the Indian judiciary’s Hinduphobia (Hindudvesh) the better it would be. When it comes to Hindus, the judiciary never tires to show its Hinduphobic side. Their different yardsticks for Nupur Sharma and Samajwadi Party’s Swami Prasad Maurya when it comes to Freedom of Speech is a case in point. In January last year, the Supreme Court (SC) stayed proceedings against Swami Prasad Maurya in the Ramcharitmanas case. While providing relief to the Samajwadi leader, the apex court showed disregard for Hindu religious beliefs, which has come to characterise a large section of the Indian judiciary.
The judiciary sees hate speech as per its convenience and in compliance with its anti-Hindu bias. Therefore, the judiciary, which takes Suo moto cognizance in all cases except where Hindus are victims, chose to ignore Udhaynidhi Stalin’s calls to eradicate Sanatan Dharma. The Indian judiciary has repeatedly bent over backwards for the Khan Market gang.
The Indian judiciary has repeatedly not just bent over backwards to please the Khan Market cabal but also taken stances that have only emboldened anti-Hindu elements to go full throttle. It is high time they are reined in because national security is too serious and important a matter to be left at the mercy of judges ready to sacrifice it for their false notions of secularism and political correctness.
In the first case, when Pakistan sponsored islamic terrorists shot dead non-muslims, mostly Hindus, Khadija Shaikh calls any action against that tragedy as “fascist”, praises slain terrorists, calls them innocent dubbing Hindus as terrorist by raising the bogey of Hinduvta, and praises islamic jihad that created Pakistan.
By uttering demonizing comments against our law and order, humanizing this terror supporter Khadija Sheikh, the actions of this Judge Gauri Godse are clearly anti-constitutional and criminal.
On the one hand just quoting Islamic reference causes top Indian judiciary to say Nupur Sharma’s “loose tongue” had “set the entire country on fire”, and basically criminalized her. But on other hand, the judiciary is defending terrorist supporters who openly mock Hindus when these Pakistan sponsored Mohammadan terrorist killed dozens in India by ambush. This judge must be impeached.
If Shiv Sena, RSS, and various other Hindu organizations are not protesting on streets and are practically as inactive as majority of Hindus, are not Hindus basically eating their own shit? They are actually endangering the online protesters by their inaction, and would not be surprised if some online protesters are arrested for their protests. Tackling the wretchedness and inferiority complex of most Hindus may appear daunting but must not discourage rest of the Hindus. Persistence is the key.
Thanks Hindupost for your efforts in resistance with sound reasoning and research.