India’s three-decade-old ban on the import of Salman Rushdie’s controversial book, The Satanic Verses, has effectively been lifted after Delhi High Court said the government had been unable to produce the original notification that imposed the ban.

India had banned the Indian-born British author’s novel in 1988 after some Muslims viewed it as blasphemous. Delhi High Court was hearing a 2019 case challenging the ban on importing the book to India. According to a November 5 court order, the Indian government told Delhi High Court that the import ban order "was untraceable and, therefore could not be produced".

As a result, the court said, it had "no other option except to presume that no such notification exists".

The Satanic Verses drew the ire of Muslim leaders in India and across the world after its publication in 1988, with many branding the book “blasphemous”. Iran’s then Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, issued a death warrant against Rushdie in a fatwa in 1989. The book’s Japanese translator, Hitoshi Igarashi, was stabbed to death in 1991, ostensibly for his links with the book.

“The ban has been lifted as of November 5 because there is no notification,” Uddyam Mukherjee, lawyer for petitioner Sandipan Khan, said.

The court verdict has swivelled the spotlight onto an open letter Rushdie had written to then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi on October 19, 1988, expressing incredulity that the book had been banned by the finance ministry and highlighting that it had not been deemed blasphemous or objectionable in itself, "but is being proscribed for, so to speak, its own good!"

Rushdie told Rajiv in no uncertain terms that “this is no way... for a free society to behave” and that Indian democracy had turned into a “laughing stock” in front of the world.

None in the finance ministry or the home ministry was available for comment on Friday on the high court order.

In the open letter, published in The New York Times on October 19, 1988, Rushdie had underlined that the finance ministry had announced the ban on The Satanic Verses on October 5 under Section 11 of the Indian Customs Act.

Rushdie said it was “profoundly disturbing” that the Indian government had “given in” to “representations by two or three Muslim politicians, including Syed Shahabuddin and Khurshid Alam Khan, both members of Parliament”.

“These persons, whom I do not hesitate to call extremists, even fundamentalists, have attacked me and my novel while stating that they had no need actually to read it,” Rushdie wrote.

The author said an “official statement” that had been “brought to my notice” had mentioned that the book had been banned as a pre-emptive measure.

“Certain passages had been identified as susceptible to distortion and misuse, presumably by unscrupulous religious fanatics and such. The banning order had been issued to prevent this misuse. Apparently, my book is not deemed blasphemous or objectionable in itself, but is being proscribed for, so to speak, its own good!” Rushdie wrote.

The author said that “many people around the world will find it strange that it is the finance ministry that gets to decide what Indian readers may or may not read”.

Dripping sarcasm, Rushdie drew attention to a “stranger statement” at the end of the ban notification. “The ministry — I am quoting from The Press Trust of India’s report — ‘added that the ban did not detract from the literary and artistic merit of Rushdie’s work’. To which I can only reply: Thanks for the good review,” he wrote in the open letter.

He called the ministry’s observation “astounding”.

“It is as though, having identified an innocent person as a likely target for assault by muggers or rapists, you were to put that person in jail for protection. This is no way, Mr Gandhi, for a free society to behave,” Rushdie wrote.

“Clearly, your Government is feeling a little ashamed of itself and, sir, it has much to be ashamed about. It is not for nothing that just about every leading Indian newspaperand magazine has deplored the ban as, for example, ‘aPhilistine decision’ (The Hindu) or ‘thought control’ (Indian Express).”

The author said eminent writers such as Kingsley Amis, Harold Pinter and Tom Stoppard had joined International PEN and India’s association of publishers and booksellers in condemning the ban.

“The right to freedom of expression is at the foundation of any democratic society, and at present, all over the world, Indian democracy is becoming something of a laughing stock,” Rushdie wrote.

Rushdie said Shahabuddin, a diplomat turned politician, “and his fellow self-appointed guardians of Muslim sensibilities” had argued that “no civilised society” should permit the publication of a book such as The Satanic Verses.

“The question raised by the book’s banning is precisely whether India, by behaving in this fashion, can any more lay claim to the title of a civilised society,” Rushdie wrote.

Rushdie “strongly denied” claims that he had “admitted” that the book was a direct attack on Islam.

“The section of the book in question (and let’s remember that the book isn’t actually about Islam, but about migration, metamorphosis, divided selves, love, death, London and Bombay) deals with a prophet — who is not called Mohammed — living in a highly fantastical city made of sand (it dissolves when water falls upon it),” he wrote.

“He is surrounded by fictional followers, one of whom happens to bear my own first name. Moreover, this entire sequence happens in a dream, the fictional dream of a fictional character, an Indian movie star, and one who is losing his mind, at that. How much further from history could one get?” he added.

“In this dream sequence I have tried to offer my view of the phenomenon of revelation and the birth of a great world religion; my view is that of a secular man for whom Islamic culture has been of central importance all his life.”

Rushdie asked if the finance ministry could say “it is no longer permissible, in modern, supposedly secular India, for literature to treat such themes”.

“If so, things are more serious than I had believed. From where I sit, Mr Gandhi, it looks very much as if your Government has become unable or unwilling to resist pressure from more or less any extremist religious grouping; that, in short, it’s the fundamentalists who now control the political agenda,” he wrote.

Rushdie alleged that Shahabuddin, Khurshid Alam and their allies “don’t really care about my novel. The real issue is the Muslim vote.”

The author resented the “use” of his book as a “political football” and said Rajiv had “come out of this looking not only Philistine and anti-democratic but opportunistic”.

“Mr Prime Minister, I can’t bring myself to address finance ministries about literature. In my view, this is now a matter between you and me. I ask you this question: What sort of India do you wish to govern? Is it to be an open or a repressive society?” Rushdie wrote, adding that Rajiv’s actions would be an “important indicator” for many people around the world.

“If you confirm the ban, I’m afraid I, and many others, will have to assume the worst. If, on the other hand, you should admit your Government’s error and move swiftly to correct it, I will be the first to applaud your honourable deed,” Rushdie wrote.

Khan, the petitioner in Delhi High Court, said he had approached the court after being told at bookstores that the novel could not be sold in, or imported to, India and after searching government websites and failing to find the official import ban order.

The government was unable to produce the order in court, he said.

“None of the respondents could produce the said notification... in fact, the purported author of the said notification has also shown his helplessness in producing a copy,” the November 5, 2024, order noted, referring to the customs department official who drafted it.

The Satanic Verses had sparked violent demonstrations and book burnings across the Muslim world and in India, which has the world’s third-largest Muslim population.

The Ayatollah’s 1989 fatwa had sent the Booker Prize-winning author into hiding forsix years.

In August 2022, about 33 years after the fatwa, Rushdie was stabbed on stage during a lecture in New York, which left him blind in one eye and affected the use of one of his hands.