Legal Uncertainty Surrounds Rushdie's Banned Classic in India

After years of inquiry, a Delhi High Court ruling leads to speculation about the status of Salman Rushdie's The Satanic Verses in India due to the missing original ban notification. Legal experts debate the implications of this potential loophole as the author continues to face threats following the book's controversial reception.

In a significant development regarding the long-standing ban on Salman Rushdie's The Satanic Verses, the Delhi High Court has sparked fresh debates around the legality of importing the book to India. This comes after the court noted that governmental authorities have been unable to locate the 1988 notification that prohibited the novel's import, leading to questions about its current validity.

The Satanic Verses, a novel that has been met with fierce criticism from parts of the Muslim community for perceived blasphemous content, was banned shortly after its release in India. The book's controversial status took a violent turn in 1989 when Iranian leader Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa calling for Rushdie's assassination, which cast the author into hiding for nearly a decade.

Despite the formal ban being in place, Sandipan Khan, a resident of West Bengal, took matters into his own hands when he attempted to purchase the book and discovered it could not be both published and imported in India. His ongoing legal battle began in 2017 with a Right to Information (RTI) request directed at the authorities inquiring about the missing notification. After several years of runarounds between various governmental departments without any success, Khan escalated the situation to the Delhi High Court in 2019, asserting that the ban infringed upon his right to freedom of reading.

On November 5, the court was pushed to declare that it “presumes” no existing ban notification can be found, leaving the door ajar for interpretations on the legality of the book's importation. Legal authorities are now weighing the implications of this presumption. Although Khan's lawyer, Uddyam Mukherjee, suggests that the absence of the ban notification could allow imports, other legal experts note that there remain practical barriers.

Former Supreme Court Judge Madan Lokur commented on the peculiar nature of the situation, highlighting that if no copy of the notification exists, then “technically no ban exists” and Rushdie's work could potentially enter the market. However, he also mentioned that the government could initiate a new ban at any time.

Meanwhile, others in the legal community urge caution. Raju Ramachandran, a senior attorney, characterized the situation as “a little extreme” to claim immediate legality for the book's import, emphasizing that the court's ruling did not grant the right to Khan for such an action. Sanjay Hegde, another prominent lawyer, remarked that while the book’s import is banned, if there was a willingness to publish it domestically, the situation could be very different.

The issue took another twist in 2012 when the Rajasthan state government sought to arrest Indian authors for reading passages from the novel at a literary festival, further complicating the cultural and political contexts surrounding the book. With the digital age making access to literature easier, the availability of online copies remains limited in India due to past controversies.

As Rushdie continues to endure threats due to his commentary on Islam — he suffered severe injuries in an attack last year — he criticizes the lack of formal reviews or judicial processes behind the original ban, a sentiment mirrored in the ongoing discussions about his work's accessibility.