A plea was filed in the Supreme Court on Tuesday seeking action against calls to socially and economically boycott Muslims in the wake of the communal violence in Haryana.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the petitioner along with advocate Rashmi Singh, mentioned the matter for urgent listing before Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud when the five-judge Constitution bench hearing the Article 370 case was about to break for lunch.

Sibal said: “…A very serious thing that has happened in Gurgaon, where there is a call in the presence of policemen to say that if you employ these people (Muslims), you will be ‘gaddars (traitors)’. This is creating a lot of tension. We have filed an urgency petition. Lordship may look at lunchtime.”

CJI Chandrachud did not comment but nodded, which was taken by lawyers as an indication that he would look into the plea.

The application filed by social activist Shaheen Abdullah through advocate-on-record Sumita Hazari has alleged that more than 27 rallies had been organised across various states where hate speeches calling for the murder and boycott of Muslims have been made despite the apex court’s specific directive on August 2 asking the authorities to ensure that no such incidents happen.

The application is based on a video that surfaced on social media on the same day as the apex court directive. The petitioner said that in the video, a purported procession by the Samhast Hindu Samaj is seen winding its way through a neighbourhood in Haryana’s Hisar, issuing warnings to residents and shopkeepers that if they continue to employ any Muslims, their shops will be boycotted. The petitioner alleged that the threat calls were made in the presence of police officers.

The transcript of the video placed before the court quoted one of the speakers as saying: “All shopkeepers pay attention. If Muslims work in your shop, fire them immediately. You have two days. If, after two days, any shopkeeper keeps a Muslim in his shop, we will declare him a traitor... stick a boycott poster outside his shop.”

The petitioner submitted that similar open calls for violence and boycott of Muslims were given by VHP leader Kapil Swami in the presence of the police in Madhya Pradesh’s Sagar on August 4.

An extract of the transcript from the video quotes the speaker as having said: “If anyone in the Mewat region is persecuting Hindus… then all the Muslims living in Mewat have no right to live there…. No man can earn a livelihood here if Hindus are being persecuted anywhere…. We think that the police will protect us, but yesterday three police officers were killed and paramilitary forces had to be called. Are we living in India or Pakistan?”

The application annexed copies of screenshots that show purported police officers accompanying the people delivering hate speeches in Sagar.

In another video of a purported rally held in Punjab’s Fazilka on August 6, a Bajrang Dal leader allegedly justifies the murder of two Muslims who were beaten before being put in a car and burnt alive in February this year.

According to the transcript of the video, one of the speakers says: “They say that Nasir and Junaid were killed. Are we to hug... (those) who slaughter cows? They know that cows are sacred for us, still they are slaughtered by them. Hindus have never troubled a Muslim or Maulvi. But when it comes to our sacred cow, our holy scriptures… then we will not just burn…. We showed them a trailer during Godhra... that should never be forgotten….”

The petition said: “Rallies that demonise communities and openly call for violence and killing of people are not limited in terms of their impact to just those areas that are currently dealing with communal tensions but will inevitably lead to communal disharmony and violence of an unfathomable scale across the country.

“It is submitted that considering the extremely precarious situation currently prevailing in the aforementioned areas, a very legitimate apprehension of communal persecution has arisen that requires the urgent attention of this Hon’ble Court. This application is made bona fide and in the interest of justice,” the petitioner added.

Responding to an earlier petition by Abdullah, the apex court had last year passed a slew of directives to curb hate speeches and iterated the orders in January this year.