Jaipur: On Thursday, Mohammed Fazlurrahim, General Secretary of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, addressed a press conference to dismiss the accusations made against him by BJP leader Dr. Kirodi Lal Meena. Fazlurrahim’s lawyer, M.A. Khan, responded to the allegations, labeling them as politically motivated and baseless.
Dr. Meena had earlier claimed that Fazlurrahim was involved in inciting Muslims, based on a video that had been circulated. However, Khan clarified that the video in question was not of Fazlurrahim but of his brother, Ziaurrahim. Khan emphasized that Fazlurrahim should not be held accountable for his brother’s actions. He accused Dr. Meena of deliberately presenting the video as Fazlurrahim’s, given the latter’s opposition to the Wakf Amendment Bill.
Khan further criticized Dr. Meena’s statement about establishing a “New Pakistan” at Sadwa Mod, calling it immature and offensive. He added that such remarks were harmful and could be considered as inciting national disunity. Referring to a similar instance from Karnataka where a judge had used such language, Khan pointed out that the Supreme Court had taken strict action, reinforcing that such statements are against national integrity.
Fazlurrahim also addressed the claim that he was conspiring with Congress leaders against Prime Minister Modi, clarifying that as part of his duties related to the Wakf Amendment Bill, he had met with leaders from various political parties, including the BJP. He further stated that he had been invited by Jagdambika Pal, Chairperson of the JPC (Joint Parliamentary Committee), to discuss the Wakf Amendment Bill on multiple occasions.
Addressing other accusations, M.A. Khan denied that Fazlurrahim had sold properties of Jamia Hidayat, stating that most of these properties were, in fact, purchased by Fazlurrahim himself. He also dismissed the claims regarding the sale of temple land and the establishment of slaughterhouses on a 1400-bigha plot of land, explaining that the purchased land was recorded under Jamia Hidayat’s name and had no connection with temple properties.
