The Central Government has filed a counter-affidavit in the Supreme Court to justify the suspension of the Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI). The SIMI Constitution, which speaks of goals such as the "establishment of an Islamic system in my country," was cited extensively by the Centre "must be seen as in direct conflict with the democratic sovereign setup of India and should not be allowed to be perpetuated in our secular society". The Centre pointed out that SIMI came into existence on 25.4.1977 and “Jehaad” (religious war) for the cause of Islam" and "Destruction of Nationalism and establishment of Islamic Rule or Caliphate" were some of its objectives.

"The organization does not believe in nation-state or in the Indian Constitution including its secular nature. It further regards idol worship as a sin, and propagates its ‘duty’ to end such practices", According to the affidavit, SIMI was used by various fundamentalist Islamic terrorist organisations operating, among other places, in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. Terrorist organisations such as Hizb-ul-Mujahideen and Lashkar-eToiba have also successfully infiltrated SIMI cadres to achieve their anti-national goals.

In response to the petition, the Centre stated: "The evidence brought on record clearly and unambiguously establishes that despite being banned since 27th September, 2001, except for a brief period in between, the SIMI activists are associating, meeting, conspiring, acquiring arms & ammunitions, and indulging in activities which are disruptive in character and capable of threatening the sovereignty and territorial integrity of India. They are in regular touch with their associates and masters based in other countries. Their actions are capable of disrupting peace and communal harmony in the country. Their stated objectives are contrary to the laws of our country. Especially their object of establishing Islamic rule in India can, under no circumstances, be permitted to subsist".

It was emphasised that, despite the ban, SIMI continues to operate undercover, with many front organisations assisting it in various activities such as fund raising, literature distribution, cadre regrouping, and so on.

The Centre also questioned the petitioner's locus standi, stating that only office-bearers can challenge the ban under UAPA Sections 4(2) and (3). The SIMI ban does not violate any fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(c) and is a reasonable restriction in the interests of the country's sovereignty and security.

The petitions against the SIMI ban have been scheduled for hearing before a bench led by Justice SK Kaul.

Case Details: Humam Ahmad Siddiqui vs Union of India 
Citation: SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CIVIL) NO. 3804 OF 2021