Supreme Court agrees to urgent hearing of CPI(M) plea for FIR, SIT probe into video depicting Assam CM

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (February 10, 2026) agreed to schedule for urgent hearing a petition filed by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) seeking the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) into instances of alleged communal speeches attributed to Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma and a recent social media post, since deleted, depicting him discharging a firearm toward an animated image of two visibly Muslim men positioned within the crosshairs of the weapon accompanied by textual phrases like ‘point-blank shot’ and ‘no mercy’.

“As elections take place, part of the elections take place in the Supreme Court,” Chief Justice of India Surya Kant remarked.

Chief Justice Kant agreed to give a date for a hearing to Advocate Nizam Pasha, who made the oral mention of the petition for an early date.

The petition accused Mr. Sarma of indulging in a “sustained pattern of hate speeches”.

Hostility against Muslim community: Petitioner

The petitioner party said Mr. Sarma, while holding the Constitutional office of the Chief Minister of the State of Assam, gave speeches which “target, terrorise, and instigate hostility and overt violence against the Muslim community residing in Assam”.

“Since assuming office, Respondent No. 4 (Sarma) has, on numerous occasions, delivered public speeches and made statements — both within and beyond the territorial limits of the State — which have been widely disseminated across print, electronic, and digital media platforms. These statements, viewed cumulatively, constitute ex facie hate speech inasmuch as they degrade and demean a minority, propagate false and stigmatising stereotypes, incite social and economic boycott, and encourage conditions of exclusion and violence against the community”.

The social media post, circulated in the public domain as a video, on February 7, 2026, from the “official handle of the Bharatiya Janata Party, Assam on X (formerly Twitter), namely, ‘BJP Assam Pradesh’ (@BJP4Assam) and thereafter widely disseminated, has been the most blatant and disturbing manifestation of the pattern complained of”.

“The final frames in the sequence culminate in a stylised portrait of Respondent No. 4 depicted in cowboy attire, accompanied by additional textual slogans translating to “Foreigner-free Assam”, “Community, land, roots first”, “Why did you go to Pakistan”, and “No forgiveness for Bangladeshis”. When viewed in its surrounding factual and political context, the cumulative symbolic and visual rhetoric embodied in the material serves to reinforce and amplify a climate of hostility, exclusion, and intimidation directed against the minority community”.

Video widely circulated, despite deletion

The petition said that the video was removed from the public domain following severe backlash. However, the material continued to be widely circulated and disseminated through multiple other accounts and platforms.

The petition reminder that national deliberations undertaken to combat communalism, regionalism, and divisive tendencies, and on the strength of the recommendations of the National Integration Conference, the Constitution (Sixteenth Amendment) Act, 1963 was enacted.

The 1963 Act had amended Articles 84 and 173 of the Constitution and the Forms of Oath in the Third Schedule to expressly mandate that Ministers and other Constitutional functionaries must swear to uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India.

“This Constitutional oath constitutes the foundational assurance that public power shall be exercised in fidelity to the Constitution and in furtherance of its core values of constitutional morality, equality, fraternity, and the sovereignty and integrity of India,” the petition said.

The Constitutional scheme imposes an affirmative and inviolable duty upon Ministers of the Union and the States to preserve national unity and constitutional fraternity. Consequently, any conduct that foments communal hatred or social fragmentation strikes at the very root of the constitutional trust reposed in holders of public office and falls outside the permissible sphere of ministerial power, the petition noted.