After withdrawing his plea from the Supreme Court, Uttar Bhartiya Vikas Sena chief Sunil Shukla has now approached the Bombay High Court, intensifying his legal battle against Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) leader Raj Thackeray and his party. Shukla’s petition calls for multiple forms of relief, including police protection for himself and his family, derecognition of the MNS by the Election Commission of India, and a complete ban on what he describes as Thackeray’s “provocative speeches.” He has accused the party of promoting hatred, enmity, and violence, in violation of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
In his plea, Shukla has also demanded the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe incidents of alleged hate speech, threats, and acts of physical aggression committed by MNS workers. As an interim measure, he has requested that the court issue immediate orders restraining Raj Thackeray from making inflammatory public statements, which he claims have fueled hostility toward north Indian communities in Maharashtra.
Shukla’s grievances stem from a series of incidents that, according to him, reveal a pattern of targeted intimidation. He alleges that on October 6, 2024, a group of about 30 MNS members and allied affiliates stormed into his party’s office premises around 3 p.m., attempting to ransack the property. Following the incident, he and his family allegedly began receiving repeated threat calls from individuals linked to the party. Despite filing multiple complaints and pursuing them with the concerned authorities for over ten months, Shukla claims that no tangible action has been taken against the accused.
Earlier, Shukla had moved the Supreme Court with a Special Leave Petition (SLP), arguing that the Maharashtra government and police had consistently ignored his appeals for protection and for registering criminal cases against MNS cadres. However, during the hearing, a bench led by Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran questioned why he had not approached the Bombay High Court first. In response, Shukla’s counsel withdrew the Supreme Court plea, opting to refile the matter at the state level. The apex court, while refraining from commenting on the merits of his allegations, granted him liberty to pursue the case before the High Court.
This legal confrontation marks yet another flashpoint in the long-standing tensions between Shukla’s Uttar Bhartiya Vikas Sena, which advocates for the rights of north Indians in Maharashtra, and Raj Thackeray’s MNS, which has frequently been accused of using anti-migrant rhetoric as part of its political stance. The outcome of this petition could have significant implications not only for the two parties involved but also for broader discussions about hate speech, political accountability, and the safety of activists in India.
