Ali Khan Mahmudabad, an associate professor who teaches political science at Ashoka University, was arrested on Sunday, May 18. The arrest comes ten days after his Facebook post on the India-Pakistan conflict ruffled feathers.<\/p>\n
Two complaints were filed against him with the Haryana police; one by the Sarpanch of Jatheri, a village in Haryana, and another by Renu Bhatia, chairperson of the Haryana State Commission for Women (HCW).<\/p>\n
Besides an academic commentary on India\u2019s military response against Pakistan and what it means for India-Pakistan relations, Khan had remarked on the \u2018optics\u2019 of the press briefings by the defence forces by having a Muslim woman officer, Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, as the face of India\u2019s military operation.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe optics of two women soldiers presenting their findings is importantly but optics must translate to reality on the ground otherwise it’s just hypocrisy\u2026 the grassroots reality that common Muslims face is different from what the government tried to show but at the same time the press conference shows that an India, united it its diversity, is not completely dead as an idea,\u201d he wrote on Facebook on May 8<\/a>, a day after India launched Operation Sindoor.<\/p>\n According to a copy of one of the FIRs (first information report)\u00a0 reviewed by Alt News, Khan has been arrested under sections 196(1)(b), 197(1)(c), 152 and 299 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). One of the lawyers working on the case confirmed the charges to Alt News.<\/p>\n This FIR was filed by a Yogesh, the village chief of Jatheri in the Sonepat district of Haryana. In his complaint, he said that at a time when Indians needed to stand united against a foreign power (Pakistan), Khan was trying to incite people against the country and hurting religious sentiments by saying that Colonel Sofiya Qureshi\u2019s presence at the press briefings on Operation Sindoor were a mere show by the government, which otherwise works against the prevention of crimes against Muslims.<\/p>\n Yogesh also claimed that Khan blamed \u2018mad\u2019 armymen for escalating tensions and conflicts between India and Pakistan. While he claimed that these comments were made in person by Ali Khan in front of a few others, he also mentioned Khan’s X and Facebook posts from May 8 in the FIR.<\/p>\n This FIR has been registered under the Rai Police Station, Sonepat, Haryana. The complaint was filed at 8:15 pm on May 17; Khan was arrested the following morning.<\/p>\n Alt News was unable to access the FIR filed by Renu Bhatia for specific details. However, Narender Kadian, deputy commissioner of police (crime), Haryana, told the press on May 18<\/a> that Bhatia\u2019s FIR was against Khan\u2019s posts on Facebook as well as him skipping the summons issued by the women\u2019s commission. He added that the FIR invokes sections 353, 79, 152 and 169(1) of the BNS against the professor.<\/p>\n The Haryana State Commission for Women had issued a notice to Khan on May 12 after taking suo motu cognisance of his social media posts (a reference to one of these was also made by Yogesh in his FIR).<\/p>\n The HCW complaint against Khan, accessed by Alt News, expresses concern over his remarks. The complaint says his remarks disparage women in uniform, misrepresent facts (by using terms like \u201cgenocide\u201d and \u201cdehumanisation\u201d in the posts) and vilify military actions and the role of women officers against cross-border terrorism. It also said that Khan\u2019s posts had the potential to incite communal unrest and violate women\u2019s dignity, outrage their modesty and breach the University Grants Commission\u2019s ethical conduct regulations for faculty. Two posts by the professor, one from May 8 and another from May 11, were attached to the complaint. Khan was asked to appear before the Commission on May 14 along with a written explanation, in the form of an affidavit, of his statements and materials or documents to justify his remarks. He was also directed to carry a copy of Ashoka University’s code of conduct for faculty and a copy of his employment contract.<\/p>\n But what is it that Khan exactly said in his Facebook and X posts that called for such a strong reaction from the women’s commission and the village chief?<\/p>\n On May 8, a day after the Indian defence forces launched the military strikes targeting terror sites in Pakistan, the Ashoka University professor wrote a post on Facebook<\/a> summarising the India-Pakistan conflict.<\/p>\n It begins with, \u201cStrategically India has actually begun a new phase in terms of collapsing distinction between military and terrorist (non-state actors) in Pakistan<\/em>\u201d and goes on to say that Operation Sindoor has made it clear that\u00a0 <\/span>\u201cresponse to terrorist attacks will be met with a military response and removes any semantic distinction between the two.<\/em>\u201d\u2026<\/p>\n Further, Khan says that those \u201cmindlessly advocating for a war<\/em>\u201d have never lived or visited a conflict zone. \u201cWar is brutal. The poor suffer disproportionately and the only people who benefit are politicians and defence companies.<\/em>\u201d<\/p>\n At the end, he made a point regarding the ‘optics’ of Operation Sindoor’s press briefings:<\/p>\n \u201cI am very happy to see so many right wing commentators applauding Colonel Sophia Qureishi but perhaps they could also equally loudly demand that the victims of mob lynchings, arbitrary bulldozing and others who are victims of the BJP’s hate mongering be protected as Indian. citizens. The optics of two women soldiers presenting their findings is important but optics must translate to reality on the ground otherwise it’s just hypocrisy\u2026 For me the press conference was just a fleeting glimpse- an illusion and allusion perhaps to an India that defied the logic on which Pakistan was built. As I said, the grassroots reality that common Muslims face is different from what the government tried to show but at the same time the press conference shows that an India, united it its diversity, is not completely dead as an idea<\/em>\u201d<\/p>\n https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/AliMahmudabad\/posts\/pfbid02xyWKawdrezZSxoS4wZCRgDAzA8S7zmCjhsTZW2K2MreyPyLmLRFFDJf1nF9yvfnGl<\/p>\n A very basic, literal reading of this post suggests that the role of women military officers was not even the main discourse or primary concern. It simply conflates the contradiction in celebrating a person of one community in a certain situation, while not speaking up when others from the same community face hate crimes.<\/p>\n It also adds that the press conference where a Muslim army officer was placed at the forefront offered a glimpse \u201cthat an India, united it its diversity, is not completely dead.\u201d<\/p>\n How the comment outraged the dignity and modesty of women remains unclear.<\/p>\n The second post annexed by the HCW in its complaint was made by Khan on May 11<\/a>. It was a comment on the abuse faced by foreign secretary Vikram Misri and his family after he announced the ceasefire. Here he criticises those clamouring for war.<\/p>\n \u201c\u2026 So when you clamour for war or you call for a country to be wiped out then what exactly are you asking? For the genocide of an entire people? I know Israel is getting away with doing this – and some Indians admire this- but do we really want to advocate the wholesale murder of children as potential future enemies?<\/em><\/p>\n Think about what it means when you say ‘wipe them out, ‘finish them,’ ‘destroy them’ etc? You are saying kill all the children, the elderly, minorities, those who are opposed to war on the other side and many other innocent people who want to do exactly what you want to do: be a father, a mother, a daughter, a son, a grandparent and a friend. You can only ask for such wholesale destruction if you have completely dehumanised them… there are madmen everywhere, but those closer to the border know what war means: it means arbitrary, unpredictable and senseless death. Those far from the border seem to think war is some kind of video game. This dehumanisation is symptomatic of deep seated insecurities within us because we somehow need to deny someone else\u2019s humanity to affirm our own but the reality is that the minute we dehumanise someone else- even though they might represent the opposite of everything we stand for- then we have given in to our basest instincts. We have sown the seeds of our own destruction.<\/em>\u201d<\/p>\n A very literal reading of this post also suggests that it is an appeal advocating for peace over war. The words genocide and dehumanisation in the context in which they have been used do not vilify India\u2019s military strength or efforts but instead urge one to think of what we really ask for when we celebrate war over ceasefire.<\/p>\n His comment, \u201cThe kind of war mongering we are seeing amongst civilians is actually disrespecting the seriousness of war and dishonouring the lives of soldiers whose lives are actually on the line<\/em>,\u201d clearly indicates that it is humanity that is being advocated for, because lives of soldiers and those who live on war-torn areas are often forgotten when emotions run high. At a very surface level, calling this seditious or affecting the nation’s sovereignty would be farfetched.<\/p>\n https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/AliMahmudabad\/posts\/pfbid02rvHaVAQf1tnGFUSbEvWkeSoPT24gCShtzro9qt3zNs35KxYL6rM8DfwCqVwqKh6pl<\/p>\n In a press briefing, HCW\u2019s Renu Bhatia criticised<\/a> Ali Khan Mahmudabad and said that she was surprised he even became a professor. \u201cWhy did he become a professor if he can\u2019t respect our daughters? What will he teach our daughters as a professor?\u201d she says, adding that he demoralised women, which is a \u201cshameful thing\u201d and has no right to remain a professor.<\/p>\n While making these remarks, she also says that he used the phrase \u201cpainted face,\u201d which Alt News did not find anywhere in Khan\u2019s posts that the Commission had attached in its complaint.<\/p>\n \u201cHow and why did he become a professor if he can\u2019t respect our daughters? What will he teach our daughters?\u201d she said. \u201cHis posts show that he has a mentality of revolt against the nation.\u201d She said that Mahmudabad was just living in India but had no love for the country. pic.twitter.com\/RpFpK8UQU3<\/a><\/p>\n \u2014 Alishan Jafri (@alishan_jafri) May 15, 2025<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n It seems as though Khan\u2019s words have not just been misinterpreted but perhaps misread because the charges in the HCW complaint and the FIRs do not add up even with the most conservative reading of Khan’s posts. How his posts are shameful, offensive to women officers of the armed forces or hurt women’s dignity has not been explained. The briefings by the two women seem to have been made to make a larger point about communal issues and the duality of many in the Right-wing.<\/p>\n How his words attack national sovereignty remains unclear as well because at no point are the actions of the government or defence forces critiqued. He actually lauds their stance, if anything. The political science professor very carefully only calls out \u201cthose who are baying for war\u201d and \u201cRight wing commentators\u201d in the posts. Are these groups being conflated with the nation or attacking national sentiments? Then that’s a deeper problem.<\/p>\n In response to the HCW\u2019s complaint and summons, Khan also issued a statement saying that his remarks have been completely misunderstood.<\/p>\n https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/photo.php?fbid=2509684409397317&set=p.2509684409397317&type=3<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Before he was arrested, 1,200 people, including academics and students, signed<\/a> a letter in support of him, urging the HCW to withdraw their complaint.<\/p>\n “From a bare reading of his original posts, it is clear that Prof. Khan praised the strategic restraint of the armed forces… and said that the optics of the women officers chosen for media debriefs was \u2018important\u2019 as proof that the secular vision of the founders of our Republic is still alive… It is preposterous that we have come to such a pass in India that even praising the army, albeit while criticizing those who clamour for war, can now invite such targeted harassment and attempted censorship,” the letter reads.<\/p>\n But Ashoka University has distanced itself from Khan\u2019s remarks. \u201cComments made by a faculty member on his personal social media pages do not represent the opinion of the university. These statements have been made by him independently in his individual capacity\u2026 Ashoka University and all members of the Ashoka community are proud of India’s armed forces and support them unequivocally in their actions towards maintaining national security. We stand in solidarity with the nation and our forces,” it said<\/a>.<\/p>\n The faculty association has, however, stood by him, calling the charges<\/a> “groundless and untenable”.<\/p>\n Khan is a historian and the head of the department at Ashoka, where he teaches political science. He has done his PhD and MPhil from the University of Cambridge and has an undergraduate degree in History and Political Science from Amherst College. He is also a member of the Samajwadi Party.<\/p>\n The charges against Ali Khan Mahmudabad are severe and can even attract imprisonment for life. The case against him is particularly disturbing because his writing and comments were fairly academic; calling them outraging women’s dignity seems like a stretch. On the other hand, the High Court had to intervene and ask Madhya Pradesh police to take cognisance of the remarks by BJP minister Kunwar Vijay Shah. Shah referred to Colonel Qureshi as a “sister of terrorists”. Meanwhile, the National Commission for Women has condemned his remarks, but has not summoned him.<\/p>\n Even the FIR filed by the police in Vijay Shah’s case became a point of controversy. The High Court slammed the Madhya Pradesh police for drafting the FIR “in such a way that it can be quashed<\/a>“. The inflammatory remarks made by the minister were not even mentioned in the complaint. Justice Atul Sreedharan, part of the division bench hearing the case, explicitly said that the contents of the FIR were \u201cvulnerable to being quashed\u201d in the absence of a description of the speech. The HC said it would oversee the investigation thereon.<\/p>\nComplaints<\/b><\/h4>\n
What Did Khan Say?<\/b><\/h4>\n
Misplaced Outrage? <\/b><\/h4>\n
\n