The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a petition filed by Humam Ahmad Siddiqui, a former member of the banned organisation Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI), challenging the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Tribunal’s confirmation of the Central Government’s latest extension of the ban on the group.

A Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta questioned Siddiqui’s locus standi to challenge the Centre’s January 29, 2024 notification—marking the ninth consecutive extension of the SIMI ban since its initial proscription in 2001 following the 9/11 terror attacks in the United States.

Appearing for Siddiqui, counsel contended that the group had been under continuous prohibition since 2001 and that several connected matters involving similar legal questions were still pending before the Court. “This is a continuing issue, and an important question of law arises,” the counsel submitted, urging the Court to issue notice and tag the matter with other pending appeals.

However, the Bench remained unconvinced. “Why are you here? Let the organisation come,” the Court remarked, questioning how the petitioner, in his individual capacity, was affected by the continuation of the ban on an organisation he claims has ceased to exist.

Siddiqui’s counsel clarified that he had previously participated in tribunal proceedings as a former member of SIMI but had since withdrawn his involvement. He further argued that the government had refused to acknowledge SIMI’s dissolution. Still, the Court remained firm in its view that Siddiqui had no standing to contest the ban, ultimately dismissing the petition.

The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Tribunal had upheld the Centre’s January 2024 notification extending the ban on SIMI under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), confirming the continuation of the five-year ban on August 7, 2024. The tribunal, set up to assess whether sufficient grounds existed for maintaining the ban, cited SIMI’s alleged role in inciting terrorism, disrupting peace and communal harmony, and advocating for the establishment of Islamic rule in India.

The Central Government has consistently maintained that SIMI poses a serious threat to national security. Even prior to its ban, the organisation had made controversial statements, including a 1996 declaration that India had failed its Muslim citizens and that a Caliphate was the only solution.

Case Title: Humam Ahmad Siddiqui v. Union of India

tg