Bhopal: The Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed authorities to ensure continued security for Additional District and Sessions Judge Tabassum Khan after reports emerged of communal threats and online abuse targeting her following a recent verdict in a mob lynching case. Taking suo motu cognisance of media reports, a division bench comprising Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Avanindra Kumar Singh expressed serious concern over threats allegedly issued against the judicial officer based on her religious identity. The matter was considered during proceedings related to a pending suo motu case concerning the security of judicial officers in the state. The High Court directed senior police and government officials to explain the measures taken to safeguard the judge and address those responsible for issuing threats and spreading inflammatory content.
The controversy arose after Judge Tabassum Khan, serving in Narmadapuram district, convicted 14 individuals on June 12 and sentenced them to life imprisonment in connection with the 2022 mob lynching of truck driver Sheikh Lala Nazir Ahmed. According to court findings, the victim was attacked and killed in Barakhar village while transporting cattle from Madhya Pradesh to Maharashtra after being accused of cattle smuggling. The court concluded that the accused had formed an unlawful assembly with the common intention of assaulting the victim. Following the verdict, protests were reportedly held by groups identifying themselves as cow protection organizations, with demonstrations escalating into online campaigns targeting the judge. Several social media posts and videos allegedly contained derogatory remarks and threats, including one viral video in which an individual reportedly threatened widespread violence if the convicted persons were not released within a specified timeframe.
Describing the threats as a direct challenge to judicial independence and the rule of law, the High Court emphasized that judicial decisions can only be challenged through legal appellate or revisional mechanisms and that judges cannot be subjected to intimidation for delivering verdicts. The bench observed that such conduct undermines the fearless and independent functioning of the judiciary and directed that police protection already provided to Judge Khan by the Superintendent of Police, Narmadapuram, should continue without interruption. The court further ordered the Superintendent of Police to submit a detailed affidavit outlining the action taken against those responsible for the threats. The state government informed the court that a First Information Report (FIR) had already been registered, while authorities in Seoni Malwa had initiated investigations to identify individuals involved in circulating threatening videos and social media posts. Additionally, the High Court directed the Director General of Police and the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) to submit personal affidavits detailing the measures being undertaken to ensure accountability and protect judicial officers from intimidation.
