The Verdict [False]
- The case was filed by lawyer Gudda Singh Uddey, not Gayasuddin, as falsely claimed on social media posts.
What is the claim?
Posts on the social media platform X (formerly Twitter) have claimed that an advocate named Gayasuddin, presumably a member of the Muslim community, petitioned the Madhya Pradesh High Court to ban an event featuring the self-styled Hindu godman, Bageshwar Baba. These posts also included a video showing the judge berating the advocate and threatening to issue a contempt notice for disrespecting the bench.
One such post stated, “Advocate Gayasuddin filed a PIL in Jabalpur High Court without tribal authorization to ban Baba Bageshwar's katha, arguing that such religious events hurt the sentiments of the tribal community. Justice Vivek Agarwal became angry with Gayasuddin's rude language and dealt with him accordingly.” Archived versions of these posts can be accessed here and here.
However, we found that the advocate in question is not named Gayasuddin and is not a Muslim.
What is the truth?
The video attached to the social media posts featured Justice Vivek Agarwal of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, as indicated by text overlays and captions used in the posts. Following this lead, we conducted a keyword search and found an article about the incident by LiveLaw.
The article quotes the judge as saying in Hindi (translated), "You people think that by misbehaving, you will garner TRPs for yourself?" In the video shared on viral social media posts, the judge is heard making the same remarks, confirming that this is indeed the same incident.
This article notes that the incident occurred on May 22, 2023, and that the petitioner's lawyer was named GS Udhe, not Gayasuddin. The petitioner sought to stop a religious event, believing it would hurt tribal sentiments.
We also located the judgment from the same date on the Madhya Pradesh High Court website, which confirmed that the petitioner’s name is ‘G.S. Uddey.’ A search revealed that his full name is Gudda Singh Uddey.
For further confirmation, Logically contacted the petitioner, who confirmed that his name is Gudda Singh Uddey, not Gayasuddin, and that he is not a Muslim. He provided a photo of his Madhya Pradesh High Court Bar Association ID card to help verify his identity.
What was the case about?
SARWA ADIWASHI SAMAJ Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH was a Public Interest Litigation filed by advocate G.S. Uddey in the Madhya Pradesh High Court, according to LiveLaw. The petitioner argued that Hindu leader Bageshwar Baba's holding of a Kathawachan, or religious reading, was hurtful to the beliefs and traditions of the tribal community.
During the hearing, an unpleasant argument broke out between the judge and the advocate, which multiple Hindi news reports covered. A clip of this argument has circulated on social media with the claim in question. The judge noted in his judgment, “Instead of answering the questions, learned counsel for the petitioners lost his cool and started showing tantrums.” It was at this point that the judge threatened the petitioner with a contempt notice. Ultimately, the petition was returned with “liberty to file a properly constituted petition.”
The verdict
The advocate who petitioned the Madhya Pradesh High Court to ban an event by the self-styled Hindu godman Bageshwar Baba is Gudda Singh Uddey, not Gayasuddin, as claimed. This has been confirmed by news reports, court documents, and an ID shared with us by the advocate.
This report first appeared on logicallyfacts.com, and has been republished on ABP Live as part of a special arrangement. Apart from the headline, no changes have been made in the report by ABP Live.