New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a series of petitions seeking a criminal investigation into Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma over allegations of hate speech and discriminatory comments directed at the "Miya" community.

A bench presided over by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant directed the petitioners to first seek relief from the jurisdictional High Court, emphasising that the apex court should not be used to bypass the authority of state-level judiciaries. The court requested that the High Court provide an "expeditious hearing", given the sensitive nature of the allegations.

"Various directions against officials are sought... In our considered view, all these issues need to be effectively adjudicated by the jurisdictional High Court," the bench noted. "Consequently, without expressing any opinion, the petitioners are at liberty to approach the jurisdictional High Court."

Allegations of Stigmatisation

The legal challenge was spearheaded by the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, a prominent organisation of Muslim scholars. The group’s president, Maulana Mahmood Madani, argued that Sarma’s use of the term "Miya", often used as a derogatory slur for Bengali-speaking Muslims in Assam, constitutes a deliberate attempt to marginalise the community.

The petition specifically highlighted a speech allegedly delivered by the Chief Minister on Jan. 27, 2026. In that address, Sarma reportedly vowed to purge four to five lakh "Miya" voters from electoral rolls and declared his party was "directly against the Miya community."

The Jamiat argued that when such remarks come from a high constitutional official, they "amount to a deliberate attempt to spread hatred, create hostility, and stigmatise an entire community."

Calls for Regulatory Guidelines

The petitioners had urged the Supreme Court to move beyond a standard FIR and establish strict regulatory guidelines for individuals holding constitutional offices. They argued that such figures should not be allowed to use their positions to incite communal animosity or hide behind the shield of free speech.

According to the plea, Sarma’s statements violate the fundamental constitutional tenets of equality, secularism, and human dignity. The organisation expressed frustration that such rhetoric has persisted despite previous Supreme Court directives aimed at curbing hate speech.

"This Hon'ble Court must consider some regulatory guidelines to keep a check on persons holding constitutional positions, delivering speeches which are communal in nature targeting/vilifying/demonising communities," the plea stated, adding that such speeches carry "no other meaning other than hatred, hostility and ill will."

While the Supreme Court did not grant the immediate appointment of a Special Investigation Team (SIT), it left the door open for the petitioners to return to the apex court if they are unsatisfied with the High Court's eventual ruling.

With inputs from ANI