Varanasi Iftar case: No bail for hurting sentiments and social harmony by desecrating the Ganges.

Upendra Bharti | HENB | Varanasi | April 1, 2026:: A Sessions Court in Varanasi has denied bail to 14 Muslim men accused in a controversial incident involving an iftar gathering on a boat along the ghats of the Ganga River, observing that their actions prima facie hurt religious sentiments and disrupted social harmony.

Bail Rejected Over “Intent to Disrupt Social Harmony”

In an order passed on April 1, Sessions Judge Alok Kumar rejected the bail pleas, noting that the accused had not only engaged in an allegedly offensive act but had also shared videos of the incident on social media platforms. The court remarked that the act of posting the video indicated a deliberate intent to disturb communal peace.

“Posting the said video on social media prima facie proves that the incident was committed with the objective of affecting social harmony,” the court observed, underscoring the seriousness of the offence in a sensitive religious context.

This is the second setback for the accused, whose bail applications were earlier rejected by an Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate on March 23.

Viral Video Triggered Legal Action

The case stems from events on March 15, when videos surfaced online showing a group of men purportedly breaking their Ramadan fast (iftar) by consuming chicken on a boat near the river ghats. The videos allegedly showed leftovers being discarded into the river, which holds deep religious significance for Hindus.

As the footage went viral, it sparked outrage and led to swift police action. Authorities registered a case against 14 individuals, including Azad Ali, Aamir Kaiki, Danish Saifi, Mohammed Ahmad, Nehal Afridi, Mahfooz Alam, Mohammed Anas, Mohammed Awwal, Mohammed Tahseem, Mohammed Ahmad alias Raja, Mohammed Noor Ismail, Mohammed Tausif Ahmad, Mohd Faizan, and Mohammed Sameer.

Charges Under BNS and Environmental Laws

The accused have been booked under multiple provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, including sections related to defiling a place of worship, outraging religious feelings, promoting enmity, public nuisance, and fouling water sources. Additionally, Section 24 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 has been invoked.

Police later added a more serious charge under Section 308(5) of the BNS (extortion under threat of death or grievous hurt), following allegations by boat owners Anil Sahani and Ranjan Sahani that the accused forcibly took control of their vessel.

Complaint and Political Reaction

The FIR was lodged based on a complaint by Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha city president Rajat Jaiswal, who alleged that the act insulted the sentiments of followers of Sanatan Dharma. He described the incident as reflective of a “jihadi mentality,” further intensifying the political undertones of the case.

Defence Arguments Rejected

Counsel for the accused argued that the complainant was not an eyewitness and questioned the credibility of the allegations, pointing out that police had failed to recover any chicken bones from the site. However, the court was not persuaded, emphasizing the broader implications of the act and its dissemination online.

Sensitive Timing Cited by Court

In denying bail, the Sessions Court also took note of the timing of the incident and its potential to inflame tensions, particularly in the run-up to major religious observances such as Eid and other festivals. The court held that the combination of the alleged act and its amplification on social media heightened the risk to communal harmony.

The case continues to draw attention as it sits at the intersection of religious sensitivities, environmental concerns, and the growing role of social media in shaping public response and legal scrutiny.
..
__Agency Inputs.