Ahead of General Elections, prominent Muslim scholars write open-letter to Muslim voters
New Delhi: Ahead of the impending general elections, Islamic scholar Syed Shabbir Ahmed Nadvi has released an open letter stressing on the constitutional right and civic duty of voting. Endorsed by notable personalities such as Hazrat Maulana Mufti Abul Qasim Naumani and Hazrat Maulana Syed Arshad Madani, the letter discusses the need for active participation in the electoral process and the importance of verifying one's inclusion in the Voters' List.
The open letter addresses key aspects of the electoral process, highlighting that failure to vote for the right candidate is equivalent to concealing testimony and may result in adverse consequences, including potential challenges to citizenship documentation and legal status.
It advocates for the election of leaders who prioritize national development, safeguard human life and property, and prevent the rise of oppressive regimes.
Syed Shabbir Ahmed Nadvi's letter also points out the potential repercussions of neglecting the voting process, such as the weakening of evidence for Indian citizenship, termination of legal status, and the possibility of unsuitable leaders ascending to power. Specific instructions are provided for voter registration, including repeated encouragement for registration, training of volunteers, and enrollment of eligible youth.
Additionally, the open letter calls on community leaders, village officials, and intellectuals to actively support and promote voter registration initiatives. It underlines the importance of ensuring consistency in the spelling of names across various identification documents and encourages households to verify and correct entries in the Voters' List.
The support and validation from prominent figures within the Muslim community, including Hazrat Maulana Khalid Saifullah Rahmani Saheb and Hazrat Maulana Syed Mohammed Ashraf Sahib Kachochvi, further strengthen the call for civic engagement.
The names of the supporting and validating Ulama and intellectuals
- Hazrat Maulana Mufti Abul Qasim Naumani Saheb
(Mohtamim Darul Uloom Deoband and Rukn Aamila Jamiat Ulema Hind) - Hazrat Maulana Syed Arshad Madani Saheb
(Sadrul Mudarriseen Darul Uloom Deoband and President Jamiat Ulema Hind) - Hazrat Maulana Syed Mohammed Ashraf Sahib Kachochvi
(President of All India Ulama and Mashaikh Board) - Hazrat Maulana Khalid Saifullah Rahmani Saheb
(President All India Muslim Personal Law Board and Mohtamim Al Mahad Al Aali Islami Hyderabad) - Maulana Syed Mahmood Asad Madani Sahib
(President of Jamiat Ulema Hind, Rukn Shura Darul Uloom Deoband) - Hazrat Maulana Sagheer Ahmad Khan Sahib
(Ameer-e-Shariat Karnataka, Mohtamim Darul Uloom Sabeelur Rashad, Bangalore) - Hazrat Maulana Mufti Ahmed Khanpuri Saheb
(Shaikhul Hadees Jamia Islamia Talimuddeen, Dhabel) - Hazrat Maulana Asghar Ali Imam Mahdi Sahib
(President of All India Jamiat Ahle-Hadith) - Hazrat Maulana Syed Bilal Abdul Hai Hasani Saheb
(Nazim Darul Uloom Nadwatul Ulama Lucknow & Secretary AIMPLB) - Janab Saadatullah Husaini Sahib
(Ameer Jamaat-e-Islami Hind) - Hazrat Maulana Muhammad Sufyaan Sahib Qasmi
(Mohtamim Dar Uloom Waqf Deoband) - Hazrath Moulana Syed Tanveer Ahmed Hashmi Saheb
(President, Jamaat Ahle Sunnat, Karnataka
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Deep societal faultlines persist despite 75 years of independence: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
Judge cites denial of home to Muslim girl, opposition to Dalit women cooking mid-day meals
Hyderabad, February 23, 2026: Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has said that despite repeated affirmations of constitutional morality by courts, deep societal faultlines rooted in caste and religious discrimination continue to shape everyday realities in India.
Speaking at a seminar on “Constitutional Morality and the Role of District Judiciary” organised by the Telangana Judges Association and the Telangana State Judicial Academy in Hyderabad, Justice Bhuyan reflected on the gap between constitutional ideals and social practices.
He cited a recent instance involving his daughter’s friend, a PhD scholar at a private university in Noida, who was denied accommodation in South Delhi after her surname revealed her Muslim identity. According to Justice Bhuyan, the landlady bluntly informed her that no accommodation was available once her religious background became known.
In another example from Odisha, he referred to resistance by some parents to the government’s mid-day meal programme because the food was prepared by Dalit women employed as cooks. He noted that some parents had objected aggressively and refused to allow their children to consume meals cooked by members of the Scheduled Caste community.
Describing these incidents as “the tip of the iceberg,” Justice Bhuyan said they reveal how far society remains from the benchmark of constitutional morality even 75 years into the Republic. He observed that while the Constitution lays down standards of equality and dignity, the morality practised within homes and communities often diverges sharply from those values.
He emphasised that constitutional morality requires governance through the rule of law rather than the rule of popular opinion. Referring to the evolution of the doctrine through judicial decisions, he cited Naz Foundation v Union of India, in which the Delhi High Court read down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, holding that popular morality cannot restrict fundamental rights under Article 21. Though the judgment was later overturned in Suresh Kumar Koushal v Naz Foundation, the Supreme Court ultimately restored and expanded the principle in Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India, affirming that constitutional morality must prevail over majoritarian views.
“In our constitutional scheme, it is the constitutionality of the issue before the court that is relevant, not the dominant or popular view,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also addressed the functioning of the district judiciary, underlining that trial courts are the first point of contact for most litigants and form the foundation of the justice delivery system. He stressed that due importance must be given to the recording of evidence and adjudication of bail matters.
Highlighting the role of High Courts, he said their supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution is intended as a shield to correct grave jurisdictional errors, not as a mechanism to substitute the discretion or factual appreciation of trial judges.
He recalled that several distinguished judges, including Justice H R Khanna, Justice A M Ahmadi, and Justice Fathima Beevi, began their careers in the district judiciary.
On representation within the judicial system, Justice Bhuyan noted that Telangana has made significant strides in gender inclusion. Out of a sanctioned strength of 655 judicial officers in the Telangana Judicial Service, 478 are currently serving, of whom 283 are women, exceeding 50 per cent representation. He added that members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, minority communities, and persons with disabilities are also represented in the state’s judiciary.
He observed that greater representation of women, marginalised communities, persons with disabilities, and sexual minorities would help make the judiciary more inclusive and reflective of India’s diversity. “The judiciary must represent all the colours of the rainbow and become a rainbow institution,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also referred to the recent restoration by the Supreme Court of the requirement of a minimum three years of practice at the Bar for entry-level judicial posts. While acknowledging that the requirement ensures practical exposure, he cautioned that its impact on women aspirants, especially those from rural or small-town backgrounds facing social and financial constraints, would need to be carefully observed over time.
Concluding his address, he reiterated that the justice system must strive to bridge the gap between constitutional ideals and lived realities, ensuring that the rule of law remains paramount.
