BJP And Opposition’s War of Words on Author Arundhati Roy’s Prosecution on 2010 UAPA Case. Why The Controversial Author is Being Prosecuted Under UAPA?

Congress, CPI(M) and Trinamool Congress together surrounds BJP on the allowance of the prosecution against Author Arundhati Roy and Sheikh Showkat Hussain under UAPA (Unlawful Activities Prevention act), a former professor in Kashmir over allegedly making provocative speech at an event in Delhi in 2010.

The FIR lodged against Arundhati Roy on Friday, was on the directions of the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi, Raj Niwas.

And the Delhi Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena has sanctioned the prosecution of ‘God of small things’ famous author Arundhati Roy, who is a former Professor of International Law at the Central University of Kashmir and Dr. Sheikh Showkat Hussain, under section 45(1) of the UAPA in an alleged sedition case in 2010.

The LG allowed the prosecution on the basis of an FIR registered against her on November 29, 2010, following a complaint by Hindu activist Sushil Pandit on October 2010.

Opposition’s Condemnation statements

The Communist Party of India (Marxist) said that the prosecution against Roy “defies logic except the fascist kind”.

On X, the Delhi LG wrote, “Condemnable! The Delhi LG has granted permission to prosecute Arundhati Roy under the draconian UAPA for a speech reportedly made 14 years ago – in 2010. Defies logic except the fascist kind. Timing is suspect since courts are on vacation, as are lawyers. Shameful and Condemnable!”

On the other hand, Congress leader Hariprasad BK said, “Fascism thrives on crushing dissent, particularly from intellectuals, artists, writers, poets & activists. BJP manufacture crises daily to distract and overwhelm dissenters enabling them to divert attention from their failures. This assault on free expression & democratic values is unacceptable,”

And Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra wrote, “If by prosecuting Arundhati Roy under UAPA BJP trying to prove they’re back, well they’re not. And they’ll never be back the same way they were. This kind of fascism is exactly what Indians have voted against,”

BJP’s reply

Clapping back at the opposition parties and to those who came in support of Arundhati Roy, BJP’s Shehzad Poonawalla said on ‘X’, “Delhi LG approves prosecution of Arundhati Roy under UAPA. Why is the Congress ecosystem rattled? First they support & take support from SDPI and now they cry for separatists. Does it not believe Kashmir is integral part of Bharat? From Afzal to Yakub – Congress puts Votebank niti above Rashtra niti ?”

So, why the UAPA was imposed against Arundhati Roy?

The reason why Author Arundhati Roy is under the clouds of UAPA because, she delivered a speech in a conference titled “Azadi- the only way”, that was held on Oct 21, at LTG Auditorium, Copernicus Marg, New Delhi.

The conference’s motto was to advocate “separation of Kashmir from India”. This slogan and the conference stemmed from the incident occured during the intense unrest in Kashmir in that time, where a 17 year old boy named Tufaul Ahmad Mattoo died from getting hit by a tear gas canister. After the death of the boy, several protests followed that led to 120 deaths according to the New York Times.

After the conference on Oct 21, a Hindu activist Sushil Pandit filed a complaint against Arundhati Roy. In his complaint he accused Roy for “jeopardising public peace and security”.

Then a FIR numbered 258/2010 was lodged that pressed sections 124A (Offence of sedition), 153A (promoting enmity between different groups), 153B(imputations prejudicial to national integration), 504 (intentional insult to provoke breach of the peace), and 505(statements conducing to public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code.

Acording to PTI, Raj niwas official gave statement, “Delhi LG, VK Saxena, has sanctioned the prosecution of Arundhati Roy and Dr Sheikh Showkat Hussain under the UAPA. Last October, the LG had granted sanction under section 196 of CrPC to prosecute them for offences under sections 153A, 153B, and 505 of the IPC.”