New Delhi

The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind has moved the Supreme Court against certain recent public remarks made by Assam Chief Minister Hemanta Biswa Sarma, terming them “communal, deeply divisive and contrary to the spirit of the Constitution”.

The application, filed by Maulana Mahmood Madani, President of the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, through senior advocate M R Shamshad, urged the apex court to frame strict and enforceable guidelines for persons holding constitutional positions, so that public offices are not misused to spread hatred or target any community.

The application has been filed in a pending petition of the Jamiat, in which the Supreme Court had reserved its order on January 20.

The plea specifically refers to a speech delivered by the Assam chief minister on January 27, in which he allegedly made objectionable remarks against members of a minority community.

The Jamiat submitted that such statements, particularly when made by a person occupying a high constitutional office, cannot be brushed aside as political rhetoric or protected free speech.

“Instead, they amount to a deliberate attempt to spread hatred, create hostility and stigmatise an entire community,” the organisation said, adding that such remarks seriously damage social harmony and violate the dignity and responsibility attached to a constitutional office.

The application further sought directions from the top court to lay down regulatory norms for constitutional functionaries, ensuring that no individual is allowed to take shelter behind their office to promote communal hatred, incite public animosity or vilify any group.

According to the plea, such guidelines are necessary to reinforce the fundamental principle that no one is above the Constitution or the law, which forms the bedrock of the rule of law.

READ MORE: Zahoor Lone-led Team India wins bronze in world snow sculpting championship

The petition also contended that statements of this nature directly undermine constitutional values such as equality, fraternity, secularism and human dignity, and therefore cannot enjoy protection under the right to freedom of speech.