‘Why misdirecting, seizing devices’: Supreme Court asks SIT probing Ashoka University professor Mahmudabad case

The bench also asked why the petitioner's devices were seized, highlighting that the SIT was constituted specifically to understand the true meaning of the social media posts and to find out if they constituted any offence.

"We just want to know from SIT...for what purpose they have seized devices? We will call them (officers)," Justice Kant told Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, who was representing the State, as quoted by LiveLaw.

"We are asking why SIT is, on the face of it, misdirecting itself. They were supposed to examine the contents of the posts," Justice Kant further said.

The bench took notice of the interim report submitted by the SIT, which acknowledged that the petitioner's electronic devices were seized during the investigation and sent for forensic examination.

Noting that the petitioner has cooperated with the investigation and surrendered his devices, the Court directed that he should not be summoned again.

It referred to its May 28 order and directed the SIT to conclude the investigation within four weeks.

On May 21, the Court granted interim bail to Mahmudabad, while directing the Haryana DGP to constitute a Special Investigation Team to “holistically understand the complexity of the phraseology employed and for proper appreciation of some of the expressions used in these two online posts.”

The SC said that the conditions imposed while granting interim bail to Mahmudabad only restrained him from commenting on the sub-judice issues and he was free to write or express opinions on other topics.

Mahmudabad's counsels had raised an apprehension that the SIT constituted by the State may investigate aspects beyond the subject FIRs. The Supreme Court clarified that the SIT probe shall be limited to the two FIRs lodged against Mahmudabad and cannot be expanded. Authorities' seeking access to Mahmudabad's digital devices was also ruled out, the report said.