Mangaluru man in Saudi jail: The story behind why Karnataka High Court pulled up Facebook

Shailesh Kumar's wife lodged a police complaint claiming that offensive message against King of Saudi and Quran was posted from a fake profile.

ByBellie Thomas

Published Jun 15, 2023 | 8:25 PMUpdatedAug 10, 2023 | 6:43 AM

Facebook representative picture

Kavitha has her fingers crossed as she waits for the weekly five-minute phone call from her husband in Saudi Arabia.

Her husband, Shailesh Kumar, used to have prolonged conversations with his wife and two children — a boy and a girl — regularly till 23 February, 2020.

A few days before that date, Kumar had made a Facebook post, praising the Indian government for passing the Citizenship (Amendment) Act and the National Register of Citizenship. Little did he then know that the post would change his life.

Soon after he posted the congratulatory message on Facebook, Kumar got trolled and even received threats. Unable to withstand the abuses being showered on him, he suspended his Facebook account.

Kumar’s problems did not end there. He soon found his fake profile on Facebook, posting derogatory comments against the Saudi ruler, the Holy Quran, and Islam. Panicked, he went to the police in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia’s capital, and reported the matter.

On 23 February 2020, Kumar, now 48, was arrested and sent to jail.

Also read: London police arrest Brazilian flatmate for murder of Telangana woman

Family meets ministers

On Thursday, 15 June, Kavitha was preparing herself to receive Kumar’s call at her Bikarnakatte residence near Mangaluru. The call could arrive on Friday — or Sunday.

She has to be brief, for Kumar has been allowed only five minutes to be on the call, which the Indian Embassy facilitated after talking with the Saudi authorities.

Kumar’s family tried to get the Indian government to intervene in the matter on their behalf. They met V Muraleedharan, the Minister of State for External Affairs, twice when he visited Mangaluru. They even appealed to S Jaishankar, the External Affairs Minister.

Both ministers gave them a patient hearing, but Kumar has remained in jail. The Indian Embassy in Saudi Arabia is in touch with the family. An official there suggested they file a writ petition, seeking an order to the Union ministry to intervene in the matter. The family heeded the advice and filed a case.

Meanwhile, Kavitha lodged a complaint with the Mangaluru police. She stated that the offensive posts were from a fake Facebook profile created in her husband’s name.

Her complaint to the Mangaluru police commissioner stated that it was a case of impersonation and her husband was framed in the foreign country.

Also read: Telangana engineer killed in US mall shooting

High court intervenes

Kavitha suspected that one of Kumar’s former roommates was behind the fake profile. Kumar’s nephew, Advocate Shreyas SK, told South First that the Riyadh police, instead of registering his uncle’s complaint, arrested him and put him in prison.

Kumar was working in a private company in Al Khobar in Saudi Arabia for more than 25 years.

While hearing Kavitha’s petition, the Karnataka High Court, pulled up Facebook on Wednesday, 14 June. The court warned the company that it would consider issuing an order to stop Facebook‘s operations in the country if it did not cooperate with the police.

The Mangaluru police, probing the case, submitted to the court that the social media giant was not cooperating with the investigation and had not yet provided the details of the person who had created Kumar’s fake profile.

The police made the submission when asked about the delay in investigating the case.

Union government asked for action-taken report

While warning Facebook, a bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit directed the social media giant to submit a complete report about Kumar’s case within a week.

The court also directed the Union Government provide to furnish the details of actions taken so far in Kumar’s case.

“The Union government should also submit a statement, disclosing the circumstances surrounding the citizen concerned, including whether he was provided legal assistance on foreign soil and whether the trial proceedings adhered to the standards of fairness prescribed by international criminal law,” the high court ordered.