The Allahabad High Court on Friday (May 15) granted bail to eight Muslim individuals arrested in connection with an alleged incident involving an Iftar gathering held on a boat in the middle of the Ganga river in Varanasi.
The case had drawn attention after allegations surfaced that non-vegetarian food was consumed during the gathering and leftover waste was thrown into the river.
In two separate judgments, first bail was granted to five persons by a single judge bench of Justice Rajiv Lochan Shukla. Another bench presided over by Justice Jitendra Kumar Sinha granted bail to three persons.
The bail order issued by Justice Sinha, stated, “The applicants have been languishing in jail since 17 March 2026 and they have undertaken to file affidavit before the learned Court concerned and the concerned police station that they will not indulge in/ repeat similar activities in future,” reported The Wire.
The applicants here refer to Mohd Sameer, Mohd Ahmad Raza and Mohd Faizan who have been asked to furnish a bond of Rs 50,000 each along with two sureties (surety refers to third party or guarantor who has assured the court about regular appearance of an accused during the trial) as part of the bail bond procedure.
“As per first information report, 14 named accused persons are said to have celebrated iftar party while sitting on a boat in the river Ganga and they are also said to have thrown the waste materials in river Ganga, including bones of chicken and the applicants have undertaken that they will not do the above act in future”, the bail order further stated.
The accused approached the High Court after a Sessions Court in Varanasi rejected their bail pleas on April 1, 2026. Their bail applications had earlier been rejected by the Chief Judicial Magistrate court.
They were arrested on March 17 by Varanasi Police following a complaint filed by Rajat Jaiswal, district president of the Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha.
The accused were booked under Sections 196(1)(b), 270, 279, 298, 299, 308 and 223(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, along with Section 24 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.
According to the complaint, the accused consumed chicken biryani during Iftar while sitting on a boat in the Ganga river and allegedly threw leftover food into the water.
The complaint stated that the act was "extremely unfortunate and condemnable". The informant also alleged that it was deliberately done to promote a "jihadi mentality" and had hurt the sentiments of Sanatan followers.
With respect to the argument made in court by the defence lawyer representing the accused Muslim men, the bail order mentions accepting the submission that “if the religious sentiments of any person or group of persons are hurt, then the applicants apologise for the same.”
The fact that those arrested did not have any criminal history was also taken into account by the high court while granting bail.
Justice Sinha has been quoted as saying in the bail order, “Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.”
The court’s decision has allowed the accused to be released pending trial, with proceedings in the matter expected to continue before the competent court as the investigation and legal process move forward.
The case had drawn attention after allegations surfaced that non-vegetarian food was consumed during the gathering and leftover waste was thrown into the river.
In two separate judgments, first bail was granted to five persons by a single judge bench of Justice Rajiv Lochan Shukla. Another bench presided over by Justice Jitendra Kumar Sinha granted bail to three persons.
The bail order issued by Justice Sinha, stated, “The applicants have been languishing in jail since 17 March 2026 and they have undertaken to file affidavit before the learned Court concerned and the concerned police station that they will not indulge in/ repeat similar activities in future,” reported The Wire.
The applicants here refer to Mohd Sameer, Mohd Ahmad Raza and Mohd Faizan who have been asked to furnish a bond of Rs 50,000 each along with two sureties (surety refers to third party or guarantor who has assured the court about regular appearance of an accused during the trial) as part of the bail bond procedure.
“As per first information report, 14 named accused persons are said to have celebrated iftar party while sitting on a boat in the river Ganga and they are also said to have thrown the waste materials in river Ganga, including bones of chicken and the applicants have undertaken that they will not do the above act in future”, the bail order further stated.
The accused approached the High Court after a Sessions Court in Varanasi rejected their bail pleas on April 1, 2026. Their bail applications had earlier been rejected by the Chief Judicial Magistrate court.
They were arrested on March 17 by Varanasi Police following a complaint filed by Rajat Jaiswal, district president of the Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha.
The accused were booked under Sections 196(1)(b), 270, 279, 298, 299, 308 and 223(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, along with Section 24 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.
According to the complaint, the accused consumed chicken biryani during Iftar while sitting on a boat in the Ganga river and allegedly threw leftover food into the water.
The complaint stated that the act was "extremely unfortunate and condemnable". The informant also alleged that it was deliberately done to promote a "jihadi mentality" and had hurt the sentiments of Sanatan followers.
With respect to the argument made in court by the defence lawyer representing the accused Muslim men, the bail order mentions accepting the submission that “if the religious sentiments of any person or group of persons are hurt, then the applicants apologise for the same.”
The fact that those arrested did not have any criminal history was also taken into account by the high court while granting bail.
Justice Sinha has been quoted as saying in the bail order, “Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.”
The court’s decision has allowed the accused to be released pending trial, with proceedings in the matter expected to continue before the competent court as the investigation and legal process move forward.

Saurabh Mukherjee
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment