Allahabad High Court Denies Muslim Scholar’s Request for Pre-Arrest Bail After Allegedly Issuing Fatwa Regarding Religious Conversion

A Muslim scholar convicted of issuing a fatwa to assassinate Jitendra Narayan Singh Tyagi, previously known as Waseem Rizvi, was recently refused anticipatory release by the Allahabad High Court.

In a FIR filed on March 18 of this year, Tyagi claimed that Maulana Syed Mohammad Shabibul Husaini had said on a YouTube channel that Tyagi’s murder was desired in reference to the fatwa declared against novelist Salman Rushdie.

Tyagi said he had received repeated threats against his life ever since he had converted to Sanatan Dharma and that these threats had continued after the aforementioned video was posted on YouTube.

Maulana Husaini’s attorney requested a pre-arrest bond, arguing that his client is a Shia scholar who is primarily interested in academics.

The attorney said that the interview in issue was conducted while Husaini was leaving New Delhi after completing his academic obligations there and that he had responded to certain inquiries from a journalist about Tyagi.

The attorney emphasized that the Maulana had only responded to certain inquiries in light of “the provisions/sermon of the Holy Quran and Islamic jurisprudence,” not issued a fatwa, since he lacked the power to do so.

The transcript of Maulana Husaini’s YouTube interview was taken into consideration by the court. Additionally, it was noted that the interview’s intent and content implied that Islam is the supreme religion and that it does not tolerate or accept other faiths.

The court emphasized that according to the interview transcript, Maulana Husaini had said that Murtad Fitri (a person who, although being born to Muslim parents, rebels against Islam and becomes a Kafir) is only punishable by death and that no one has the right to beg forgiveness for him).

The court also made note of Maulana Husaini’s use of Imam Khomeini’s fatwa to murder novelist Salman Rushdie to support his position during the interview.

Given that Wasim Rizvi was a Muslim who had converted to Kufr (not believing in Allah), the court found that he had justified the killing of Wasim Rizvi.

In addition, the court raised worry at Maulana Husaini’s attempt to defend his interview answers in the affidavit.

“…the applicant has supported his claims and has testified under oath that ‘he had given the statement according to Islamic Jurisprudence (Shia-Jafri) based on many books, where it is written that according to the Jafri or Imami school, the male apostates must be put to death, while the female apostates must be kept in solitary confinement until they repent and return to Islam. The court said that leaving Islam is deemed a crime.

Importantly, the court emphasized that notwithstanding Maulana Husaini’s assertion that he had solely alluded to the laws/sermon of the Holy Quran and Islamic law, he had really made no particular reference to any verses.