“Considering the gravity of the offence, the involvement of applicant and other accused with particular motive organized attempts, and the necessity of detailed investigation regarding undue influence on the victim, imbibing or forcing particular religion under threat or otherwise. Considering the seriousness and magnitude of the alleged offence, the role attributed to the applicant, and the settled legal principles, the court is of the opinion that this is not a fit case for granting anticipatory bail. Application is devoid of merit.” (Para 26)

The application, filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, pertains to Crime No. 156/2026 registered at Deolali Police Station under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Prosecution Narrative: Organised coercion and religious influence

The prosecution case is anchored in allegations that the primary accused, Danish Sheikh, induced the victim into a physical relationship under the pretext of marriage, while co-accused Tausif Attar allegedly subjected her to harassment and threats. Within this framework, the present applicant’s role is described as facilitating and reinforcing religious influence over the victim.

According to the investigation, Khan is alleged to have:

• Provided the victim with a burqa and religious literature
• Installed religious applications and shared faith-based digital content
• Instructed the victim in offering namaz and observing religious practices
• Visited the victim’s residence for such instruction
• Participated in efforts to change the victim’s name and explore relocation abroad

The prosecution further asserts that the accused contemplated sending the victim to Malaysia and engaged intermediaries in Malegaon, with the investigation examining possible financial and organisational links. Alongside these allegations are claims of caste-based humiliation in the workplace, with the victim asserting that the accused were aware of her Scheduled Caste identity and targeted her on that basis. Additionally, the Court recorded allegations that the accused made derogatory remarks about Hindu deities, which it treated as contributing to offences under Section 299 BNS relating to injury to religious sentiments.

Defence Submissions: Weak FIR, political motive, and over-criminalisation

The defence contested the applicant’s involvement on multiple grounds:

• The FIR, as originally lodged, did not contain allegations of religious conversion; such claims emerged only in subsequent statements
• The more serious penal provisions were not attributable to the applicant
• Maharashtra does not have a specific law criminalising religious conversion, raising questions about the legal framing of the allegations
• The applicant’s role was exaggerated, with primary allegations directed at co-accused
• The interactions between the parties arose out of personal relationships and cannot be criminalised
• The case was politically motivated, triggered by interpersonal disputes

The applicant also relied on her pregnancy as a ground for protection from arrest.

A detailed report of the case and its allegations may be read here.

Court’s Reasoning: Expansive reading of “brainwashing”

The Court put notable weight on the allegations of “brainwashing” as a unifying thread across disparate allegations. While it acknowledged that the more serious provisions (Sections 69 and 75 BNS) were not directly attributable to Khan, it nonetheless held that her conduct—particularly providing religious materials and instruction—was sufficient to establish prima facie involvement in a coordinated plan. The Court, thus, held that the material on record prima facie establishes her involvement in offences under Section 299 BNS and the Atrocities Act.

“No doubt, Sections 69 and 75 of the BNS are not attracted against the present applicant, but the entire investigation shows that accused Nos.1 and 2, with the help of the applicant, tried to brainwash the victim and tried to teach that the Hindu religion has objectionable stories. They have also specifically made obscene remarks against Lord Shiva, Lord Krishna, and Brahmadeva and hurt religious sentiments. The investigation also shows that applicant gave a ‘Burqa’, the accused also provided a life story book of Prophet Muhammad Paigambar. The material on record shows that the applicant used to visit the victim’s house to give training regarding ‘Namaz’ and other daily religious observations.” (Para 19)

It observed that:

• The applicant’s role is “clearly mentioned” in the FIR and subsequent statements
• The provision of a burqa, religious texts, and guidance on rituals indicates active participation
• The alleged conduct reflects an “organised attempt” rather than isolated acts

The Court concluded that these elements, taken together, indicate an organised attempt to influence the victim’s beliefs and conduct. At the same time, the Court acknowledged that the victim retains a constitutional right to profess and adopt any religion. It, however, drew a distinction between voluntary exercise of that right and what it described as “organised” or “planned” influence, holding that the latter may attract criminal scrutiny where accompanied by coercion or undue pressure.

“Prima facie, it appeared that the applicant’s role is specifically mentioned, and involvement is also seen. The magnitude of the offense is truly multi-dimensional and multi-layered. The material on record shows that the accused tried to change the victim’s name. No doubt, the victim has a Constitutional right to profess any religion and have any name of her own choice, but that does not mean she should be brainwashed for the same and that too with organised plan. The material on record shows that after changing the name, the accused wanted to send her to Malaysia. For the purpose of changing the name, they were taking the help of the Malegaon party. Admittedly, names of some cities and countries were revealed during the investigation. Considering the applicant’s involvement along with the other accused and the magnitude of the offense, custodial interrogation is necessary to go to the root of the case.” (Para 20)

“On perusal of material on record, it is clear that the investigation is complicated and multi-dimensional. In these premises, the physical custody of the accused is warranted.” (Para 21)

Custodial Interrogation: Central to denial of relief

A critical aspect of the defence—namely, the absence of conversion-related allegations in the FIR—does not receive substantial engagement in the Court’s reasoning. Instead, the Court accepts the prosecution’s position that an FIR is not an “encyclopedia” and that supplementary statements can elaborate the narrative.

“Ld. DGP further submitted that the applicant used to visit the victim’s house to give training of her religion. The investigation shows that the victim’s name was to be changed to Haniya, and she was to be sent to Malaysia. The documents were to be prepared with the help of the Malegaon Party. In these circumstances, custodial interrogation is necessary to investigate whether any international syndicate is involved and whether the applicant is connected to the same. An FIR is not an encyclopedia. The supplementary statement and the statement under Section 183 of the BNSS speak about the same. The applicant also tried to convert the family members by making threats and using dominant position in the office. She also asked the victim to observe the fast of Ramadan (Roza). The accused, including the applicant, tried to change the victim’s name, and some city and country names were revealed during the investigation. Foreign funding and the money trail need to be investigated. Therefore, custodial interrogation is necessary.” (Para 9)

A decisive factor in the rejection of anticipatory bail was the Court’s conclusion that custodial interrogation was necessary. It noted that:

• The investigation is ongoing and involves multiple accused
• Digital evidence, communication trails, and alleged external links require further examination
• The applicant may need to be confronted with co-accused and witnesses

Relying on established precedent, the Court reiterated that anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy and should not be granted where investigation is at a crucial stage and custodial interrogation is required.

“Admittedly, the applicant is seeking anticipatory bail on the ground that she has not committed any offence, as alleged and she is falsely implicated. It is settled legal principle that the power under Section 482 of BNSS being an extraordinary remedy has to be exercised sparingly. The alleged offence seems to be systematic plan of brainwashing of the victim with organized attempts. It is also settled legal principle by way of catena of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court and Hon’ble High Court in various bail matters that the pre-arrest bail should be granted only in exceptional cases.” (Para 24)

“Needless to say that grant of anticipatory bail to some extent, would cause interference in the sphere of investigation of an offence. Anticipatory bail is not to be granted as a matter of rule and has to be granted only when there are convincing, exceptional circumstances exist to resort that extraordinary remedy.” (Para 25)

While this is doctrinally correct, the order does not meaningfully address the implications of such post-FIR “improvements,” especially when they introduce entirely new dimensions such as international relocation, organised conspiracy, and religious conversion. At the anticipatory bail stage, where the test is prima facie satisfaction rather than proof, courts are still expected to scrutinise material for consistency and credibility—an exercise that appears relatively thin here.

Criminalising religious conduct?

One of the more troubling aspects of the order is its treatment of religious acts—such as giving a burqa, sharing religious literature, or teaching prayer—as indicators of criminal intent. In the absence of a specific anti-conversion statute in Maharashtra, the Court effectively reads these acts into offences relating to religious insult and coercion.

This raises a broader doctrinal concern: can acts of religious propagation, absent clear evidence of force, fraud, or inducement, attract criminal liability? The order does not articulate a clear standard. Instead, it relies on the cumulative narrative of “brainwashing,” a term that carries strong moral connotations but lacks precise legal definition.

Custodial Interrogation: Justified or assumed?

The denial of anticipatory bail ultimately turns on the Court’s conclusion that custodial interrogation is necessary. The Court cites the complexity of the investigation, the need to explore digital evidence, and possible international links.

However, the justification appears somewhat speculative:

• References to “foreign funding” and “international syndicate” are based on investigative assertions rather than concrete material
• The necessity of custodial interrogation for recovering digital evidence—such as messages or app installations—could arguably be achieved through less intrusive means

The reliance on precedents like State v. Anil Sharma and Jai Prakash Singh is doctrinally sound, but their application here appears formulaic rather than tailored to the specific facts.

Pregnancy argument rejected without nuanced consideration

The Court summarily rejects the applicant’s plea based on pregnancy, observing that the law does not distinguish between a “normal person” and a pregnant woman in matters of criminal liability.

While technically correct, this reasoning overlooks established jurisprudence that courts may consider humanitarian factors, including pregnancy, when exercising discretionary powers in bail matters. The absence of any balancing exercise here reflects a rigid approach.

Conclusion

The Sessions Court’s order is undeniably forceful in its tone and clear in its outcome: anticipatory bail is denied in light of the seriousness and complexity of the allegations. It underscores the judiciary’s increasing sensitivity to cases involving coercion, caste-based harm, and workplace exploitation.

At the same time, the order leaves several critical legal questions insufficiently addressed:

• What is the threshold for criminal liability in cases involving religious influence?
• How should courts treat significant improvements in prosecution narratives at the bail stage?
• To what extent can speculative elements—such as international links—justify custodial interrogation?

By relying heavily on the language of “brainwashing” and “organised influence,” the order risks blurring the line between constitutionally protected religious interaction and criminal conduct.

The complete order may be read below:

Related:

From FIRs to “Corporate Jihad”: How the TCS Nashik case was transformed from an investigation into a communal narrative

Allahabad High Court flags surge in “false” conversion firs, seeks accountability from UP government

Censorship and the Drumbeats of Hate: Mapping the state of free speech ahead of the 2026 polls

Maharashtra’s Anti-Conversion Bill: Legislating suspicion in the name of “love jihad”

The post Anticipatory Bail Denied to Nida Khan in TCS Nashik Case: Sessions Court flags “systematic plan” and stresses custodial interrogation appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Delivering the ruling on April 9, 2026, Justice N. Tukaramji articulated a clear constitutional standard: that the legitimacy of an investigation is not measured solely by procedural compliance, but by whether it inspires confidence as being fair, impartial, and independent. Where that confidence is reasonably shaken, judicial intervention becomes not exceptional, but necessary.

A death within the force, a case against the force

The case concerns the death of P. Prabhakar Reddy, a Sub-Inspector posted at Kukunoorpally Police Station in Siddipet district, who allegedly died by suicide on June 14, 2017, using his service weapon at the police headquarters.

While the factum of death by firearm injury was not disputed, the circumstances surrounding it, and more importantly, the investigation that followed, became deeply contested.

The writ petition, filed by the deceased’s widow and mother, alleged that the suicide was the culmination of sustained harassment and coercion by a senior officer, the then Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP), Gajwel. According to them, the deceased had been compelled to carry out illegal and unofficial tasks, resulting in severe mental distress. But the allegations did not end with abetment.

The petitioners asserted that immediately after the incident, the very officer under suspicion entered the scene, secured and controlled access to the premises, and removed a suicide note purportedly written by the deceased—an act with obvious and profound evidentiary implications. They further alleged tampering with the crime scene and removal of valuables from the body, suggesting not merely bias, but active interference with the integrity of evidence.

The State’s Defence: Personal distress, procedural compliance

The State sought to neutralise these allegations by attributing the suicide to personal distress. It argued that the deceased feared implication in a separate criminal case, which could have damaged his career and reputation, thereby pushing him toward suicide.

It further maintained that the investigation had been conducted in accordance with law: post-mortem confirmed the cause of death, forensic examinations were carried out, statements were recorded, and ultimately, a final report was filed finding no incriminating material against the ACP. In essence, the State’s position rested on procedural sufficiency.

Reframing the Legal Question: From outcome to process

The High Court decisively rejected this framing. It held that the central issue was not the cause of death, but the credibility of the investigation. This distinction is critical: even if the conclusion of suicide were correct, the process by which that conclusion was reached must independently satisfy constitutional standards.

“It is not in dispute that the deceased died due to a gunshot injury inflicted by his service weapon, and that a case under Section 306 was registered. However, the core issue pertains to the fairness, impartiality, and credibility of the investigation.” (Para 7)

The Court thus shifted the analytical lens from evidentiary outcome to procedural integrity—insisting that justice is not merely a matter of results, but of the fairness embedded in the method.

“Reasonable Likelihood of Bias”: A constitutional threshold

At the core of the judgment lies a powerful articulation of the doctrine of apparent bias. Relying on precedents such as Babubhai v. State of Gujarat and State of West Bengal v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, the Court reaffirmed that a fair and impartial investigation is an inseparable component of Article 21. However, it went a step further. It held unequivocally that:

“Further, in cases where allegations are made against police officials themselves, investigation by the same agency may give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.  Even in the absence of proven mala fides, reasonable likelihood of bias is sufficient to warrant transfer of investigation.” (Para 10)

This formulation is doctrinally significant. It lowers the threshold for intervention from demonstrable wrongdoing to credible apprehension—recognising that institutional structures themselves can generate bias, particularly where police officers are tasked with investigating their colleagues or superiors.

Institutional conflict and the problem of self-investigation

The judgment squarely confronts a persistent structural problem in criminal justice: the investigation of police wrongdoing by the police themselves.

The Court noted that:

• Serious allegations—including abetment of suicide and destruction of evidence—were directed against a senior officer
• The same police establishment was responsible for investigating those allegations
• Key claims, such as removal of a suicide note and tampering with the scene, went to the heart of evidentiary integrity

These factors, taken together, created what the Court termed a “reasonable apprehension of lack of fairness,” sufficient to erode public confidence in the investigation.

“In the instant case, the allegation regarding removal of the suicide note is of significant evidentiary value; allegations of tampering with the crime scene and removal of valuables raise serious doubts; the investigation has remained pending for a considerable period; the accused officer belongs to the same department conducting the investigation. These factors cumulatively create a reasonable apprehension of lack of fairness, thereby undermining public confidence in the investigative process.” (Para 11)

Importantly, the Court did not require proof that the investigation was actually biased. It recognised that in such cases, the structure itself produces a conflict that is incompatible with constitutional expectations.

Article 21 as a guarantee of investigative integrity

The ruling reinforces and deepens the jurisprudence that places fair investigation within the ambit of Article 21.

The Court held that the existing probe “does not inspire confidence” and falls short of the constitutional mandate of fairness and impartiality.

“In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the investigation conducted by the local police does not inspire confidence and falls short of the constitutional mandate of a fair and impartial investigation under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.” (Para 12)

This is not merely a critique of investigative lapses—it is a constitutional indictment. It affirms that the right to life and personal liberty includes the right to an investigation that is:

• Independent
• Unbiased
• Credible in both fact and perception

By grounding its reasoning in Article 21, the Court elevates investigative fairness from a procedural expectation to a fundamental right.

Evidentiary gaps, timing concerns, and loss of confidence

The Court’s reasoning is also anchored in specific factual concerns:

• The alleged removal of the suicide note—described as having significant evidentiary value
• Claims of tampering with the crime scene and removal of valuables
• The prolonged pendency of the investigation
• The filing of the final report only after the writ proceedings had commenced

Each of these factors, while not conclusively establishing wrongdoing, contributed to a cumulative erosion of trust in the investigative process. The Court’s approach is notable for its cumulative reasoning: it is not any single irregularity, but the aggregation of circumstances that renders the investigation constitutionally suspect.

Directions: Resetting the investigation

In allowing the writ petition, the Court ordered a comprehensive transfer of the investigation to the CBCID, with clear and structured directions:

• The transferee agency is empowered to conduct further or even de novo investigation
• All records, material objects, and forensic reports must be handed over immediately
• The CBCID must independently examine all allegations, including abetment, evidence tampering, and removal of the suicide note
• The investigation is to be completed within nine months
• Periodic progress reports must be submitted before the jurisdictional Magistrate

These directions reflect not just a transfer, but a judicially supervised reset of the investigative process.

Beyond the Case: A Structural Message

This judgment resonates beyond the facts of a single case. It sends a broader institutional message:

• Self-investigation in cases of alleged police wrongdoing is inherently suspect
• Perception of fairness is as critical as fairness itself
• Courts will intervene not only to correct bias, but to prevent its reasonable apprehension

In doing so, the Court strengthens the architecture of accountability within the criminal justice system. The Telangana High Court’s ruling is a forceful reminder that the criminal justice system derives its legitimacy not from authority, but from trust. Where that trust is undermined—whether by actual bias or its reasonable appearance—the Constitution demands corrective action.

By holding that reasonable apprehension of bias is enough, the Court has set a robust and rights-oriented standard—one that prioritises institutional integrity over procedural defensiveness, and constitutional fidelity over investigative convenience.

The complete judgement may be read below:

Related:

Reproductive Autonomy Cannot Be Subordinated to Adoption: Supreme Court allows termination of 7-month pregnancy of minor

Malegaon 2006 Blast Case: Bombay High Court rejects NIA’s ‘alternate narrative’, holds prosecution built on contradictions and inadmissible evidence

From Cow Slaughter to “Public Order”: Allahabad High Court’s expanding use of preventive detention

Decoding the Judgement on Sathankulam Custodial Death:Part-3 Witnesses to be Celebrated & Honoured

The post “Reasonable Apprehension of Bias Is Enough”: Telangana High Court orders CBCID probe into SI’s death, reasserts constitutional demand for investigative neutrality appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Expressing deep concern over the implications of such orders, the Court underscored that they strike at the dignity of the accused and proceed on an impermissible assumption of guilt at the pre-trial stage. It further warned that such “caste-coloured and oppressive” conditions have the potential to generate serious social friction and risk bringing disrepute to the judiciary. Notably, the Court acknowledged that the pattern emerging from the cases gave rise to a perception of caste bias, observing that there appeared to be substance in reports suggesting that such conditions were disproportionately imposed on individuals from marginalised communities. Invoking the constitutional vision of a casteless society, the Bench referred to Articles 14, 16, and 17, reminding courts of their duty to safeguard equality and dignity, especially for the most vulnerable.

The suo motu proceedings were triggered by a detailed media reports published over the past weeks by Article 14, which brought to light a troubling pattern in bail jurisprudence emerging from Odisha. While early reports identified at least eight cases between May 2025 and January 2026 where courts, particularly in Rayagada district, had imposed cleaning duties as bail conditions, further investigation revealed that the practice was far more widespread. According to Bar & Bench, a single judge of the Orissa High Court had passed at least 50 such orders between April and September 2025, directing accused persons in a wide range of cases to undertake cleaning work at police stations, hospitals, temples, roads, and other public spaces for fixed durations.

Ground reportage by Article 14 added a critical socio-political dimension to these findings, documenting how many of those subjected to such conditions were Dalit and Adivasi individuals, several of whom had been arrested in connection with protests against a proposed bauxite mining project in Odisha’s Tijimali region. The report highlighted concerns that these bail conditions were not only legally untenable but also carried the imprint of caste-based stigma, compelling members of historically marginalised communities to perform labour long associated with social oppression. It is against this backdrop—where questions of liberty, dignity, caste, and judicial discretion intersect—that the Supreme Court has now stepped in, transforming what began as a series of individual bail orders into a moment of constitutional reckoning.

The proceedings

Taking serious exception to the practice, the Supreme Court of India termed such conditions “obnoxious” and reflective of a deeply troubling caste bias within the justice system.

“We are deeply disappointed and disheartened, and express our strongest disapproval at the manner in which the Odisha State judiciary has, in fact regressed to a colonial mindset by imposing such onerous, degrading and humiliating conditions, which are ex-facie violative of human rights. Such conditions, far from advancing the cause of justice, strike at the dignity of the accused, and proceed on the premise of guilt, which is completely impermissible in law,” the Court observed, as per LiveLaw.

Declaring the impugned bail conditions “null and void”, the Court categorically directed that no court in the country should impose such conditions in the future.

“We are of the considered view that no other State judiciary shall also ought to impose such caste-coloured and oppressive conditions, which have the potential to generate serious social friction,” the Bench noted, directing that its order be circulated to all High Courts across India.

The Court further acknowledged the disturbing implications of the pattern revealed through media reports, noting that the overwhelming number of those subjected to such conditions belonged to marginalised communities.

“There seems to be some force in the reportage that no such conditions are being imposed by the State judiciary in cases where the accused are from the privileged sections of society. Assuming such conditions were imposed inadvertently or without any premeditated bias, the nature of the conditions are so abhorrent, cruel, degrading and unknown to the law, that there is a potential to cast a serious aspersion suggesting that the Odisha judiciary is afflicted by caste-based bias,” the Court observed, reported LiveLaw.

Invoking the transformative vision of the Constitution, the Court explicitly referred to Article 17, which abolishes untouchability, and emphasised the guarantees of equality under Articles 14 and 16.

“A judiciary is entrusted with the duty to safeguard these constitutional guarantees and is expected to jealously protect those who are most vulnerable. Over the course of 75 years of the Constitutional journey, the judiciary has transformed the principle of equality into a potent instrument in the hands of citizens, ensuring that the might of the State cannot transgress fundamental rights,” the Bench underscored.

The Bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, was hearing a suo-moto case registered on the basis of multiple media reports highlighting the controversial bail conditions.

Addressing the Advocate General of Odisha, Pitambar Acharya, the Chief Justice made his disapproval unequivocally clear:

“Unfortunately, the High Courts and some trial courts in Odisha are imposing some bail conditions which are obnoxious, reflecting caste-based bias, and bringing a bad name to the judiciary. Directing the accused to clean the police station for two months—this should not be a condition a judiciary should be imposing in 2026.”

From “isolated orders” to a pattern of judicial practice

Initial reporting by LiveLaw indicated that the trigger for the Supreme Court’s intervention was a set of bail orders, including a May 28, 2025 order of the Orissa High Court directing one Kumeswar Naik to clean the premises of the Kashipur Police Station daily between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. for two months. The report also identified at least eight such orders passed between May 2025 and January 2026, largely emanating from trial courts in Rayagada district.

However, a deeper investigation by Bar & Bench fundamentally alters the scale of the issue. According to its analysis of e-courts data, Justice S.K. Panigrahi of the Orissa High Court alone passed at least fifty bail orders between April and September 2025 incorporating similar “community service” conditions.

These were not confined to a narrow category of offences. Rather, they cut across the criminal spectrum—from theft and cheating to grave offences including murder. Nor were they limited to a single type of institution. The directions required accused persons to clean police stations (the most frequent site), hospitals, temples, village roads, ponds, and even a bank branch in one instance.

The structure of these orders was strikingly consistent:

• Mandatory cleaning duties for 2–3 hours daily, typically between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m.;
• Fixed durations ranging from one to three months;
• Detailed specification of location and time, often leaving little room for practical flexibility.

Crucially, as Bar & Bench notes, no other judge of the Orissa High Court appears to have adopted such a practice, raising further questions about the individual exercise of judicial discretion.

Bail or punishment?

At the heart of the controversy lies a foundational principle: bail is not punishment. Under established criminal law doctrine, bail conditions are preventive and procedural—not punitive. Their purpose is limited to ensuring that the accused:

1. Appears for trial;
2. Does not tamper with evidence;
3. Does not influence witnesses;
4. Does not commit further offences.

The imposition of compulsory labour—particularly labour that is unrelated to these objectives—sits uneasily, if not entirely incompatibly, with this framework.

The legal tension becomes sharper when viewed in light of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. While the BNS introduces “community service” as a recognized form of punishment, this is explicitly a post-conviction measure, applicable only upon a finding of guilt and only for specific, relatively minor offences.

As highlighted in Bar & Bench, and reinforced by a June 2025 decision of the Kerala High Court, community service cannot be transposed into the bail stage. To do so effectively collapses the distinction between accusation and conviction—between presumption of innocence and adjudicated guilt.

Moreover, the absence of proportionality is stark. Identical cleaning conditions were imposed on individuals accused of vastly different offences, without any discernible calibration based on the gravity of the alleged crime or the circumstances of the accused.

When Context Matters: Anti-mining protests and criminalisation of dissent

The controversy cannot be understood in isolation from its socio-political context, meticulously documented in Article 14’s ground report.

A significant number of the affected individuals were arrested in connection with protests against a proposed bauxite mining project in the Tijimali hills of Odisha. The project, linked to Vedanta Ltd., has been resisted by local communities—primarily Dalits and Adivasis—on grounds of displacement, environmental degradation, and alleged violations of statutory safeguards under laws such as the Forest Rights Act (FRA) and the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act (PESA).

According to Article 14, since 2023:

• At least 40–50 individuals have been arrested in connection with these protests;
• FIRs have invoked serious charges, including rioting, obstruction of public servants, and even attempt to murder;
• Protesters have alleged coercion, fabricated consent processes, and police intimidation.

Within this broader pattern, the imposition of onerous and humiliating bail conditions begins to resemble not merely judicial overreach, but an extension of state response to dissent.

The Caste Dimension: Labour, stigma, and constitutional morality

Perhaps the most constitutionally troubling aspect is the social profile of those subjected to these conditions.

As Article 14 documents:

• Of eight identified cases involving such bail conditions, six accused were Dalits and two were Adivasis;
• Many were associated with grassroots resistance movements;
• The imposed labour—cleaning public spaces, particularly police stations—carries deep historical associations with caste-based occupational hierarchies.

For individuals like Kumeswar Naik, a Dalit protester, the bail condition translated into a daily ritual of enforced humiliation—returning to the very police station where he had been detained, to perform cleaning work under judicial mandate.

Many have argued that such orders are not neutral. They operate within, and risk reinforcing, a social structure where certain forms of labour have historically been imposed on marginalized communities.

This raises serious constitutional questions:

• Does compelling such labour violate Article 21’s guarantee of dignity?
• Does it amount to “forced labour” under Article 23, even if framed as a bail condition?
• Does the disproportionate impact on Dalit and Adivasi accused implicate Article 14 (equality) and Article 15 (non-discrimination)?

The answers to these questions go beyond doctrinal legality—they engage the idea of constitutional morality itself.

Judicial innovation or judicial overreach?

Indian courts have, in the past, experimented with “creative” bail conditions—ranging from planting trees to distributing books. While such measures have occasionally been justified as reformative or restorative, the Supreme Court has repeatedly cautioned against conditions that are:

• Unconnected to the purpose of bail;
• Disproportionate or excessive;
• Infringing upon fundamental rights.

What distinguishes the Odisha cases is not merely creativity, but compulsion—and the nature of the work imposed. Cleaning police stations, hospitals, or temples under court order is not symbolic. It is labour—mandated, time-bound, and enforceable.

The fact that these conditions were often imposed uniformly, without individualized reasoning, further strengthens the case for constitutional scrutiny.

Conclusion: Bail, dignity, and the rule of law

The Supreme Court’s suo moto intervention, reportedly prompted also by representations from civil society, including a letter signed by over 80 lawyers and activists, signals institutional recognition that the issue transcends individual orders. At its core, the controversy forces a return to first principles.

Bail is the juridical expression of the presumption of innocence. It is not a site for experimentation with punishment, nor a vehicle for moral correction, nor an instrument—directly or indirectly—of social discipline. When liberty is made conditional upon labour—especially labour that carries historical stigma—the line between justice and coercion begins to blur.

By declaring such bail conditions “null and void” and prohibiting their future imposition, the Supreme Court has not merely corrected a set of problematic orders—it has drawn a clear constitutional boundary.

The judgment serves as a powerful reaffirmation that:

• Bail cannot be used as a site for punishment;
• Judicial discretion is not unbounded;
• Dignity is integral to liberty;
• And the criminal justice system must remain free from caste prejudice—whether explicit or structural.

Related:

Police action in Odisha’s Rayagada district condemned, Adivasi rights paramount: CCG

Fractured Fault lines: Violence, governance gaps, and rising tensions across Odisha

Odisha: 18 months, 54 incidents of communal hate crimes, 7 mob lynchings

Publicly Tortured, Forced to Eat Cow Dung: No arrests in Odisha Pastor assault case

The post “Obnoxious and Caste-Coloured”: Supreme Court strikes down Odisha bail orders mandating cleaning work, declares them void appeared first on SabrangIndia.

At the heart of FSC’s report lies a central claim: that the crisis of press freedom in India is no longer episodic or incidental, but structural. It manifests not only through spectacular acts of violence—murders, assaults, targeted attacks—but equally through the slow, grinding violence of the legal system. Arrests under expansive national security laws, prolonged pre-trial detentions, repeated transfers across prisons, and endless procedural delays together form a continuum of control that ensures dissenting voices are not merely challenged but systematically neutralised.

This broader climate is reflected in India’s ranking of 157 out of 180 countries in the 2026 World Press Freedom Index published by Reporters Without Borders (RSF), which categorises the country’s press conditions as “very serious.” FSC contextualises this ranking by pointing to the consolidation of media ownership, the overt political alignment of major news platforms, and the increasing vulnerability of independent journalists who operate outside institutional protection. In such an ecosystem, the cost of critical reporting has escalated dramatically.

Even the apparent absence of journalist killings in official records for 2026, FSC notes, is misleading. The killing of Andhra Pradesh-based journalist Jaganmohan Reddy, reportedly targeted for his investigative work on red sanders smuggling, occurred just days before the RSF report was released. His death, along with the severe injuries inflicted on his colleague, underscores the persistent dangers journalists face when exposing entrenched criminal-political nexuses. This incident joins a disturbing continuum that includes the killings of Mukesh Chandrakar in Bastar and Rajeev Pratap in Uttarakhand, as well as the deeply disconcerting acquittal of powerful figures in the long-pending murder case of journalist Ram Chandra Chhatrapati. The message, FSC suggests, is unmistakable: impunity remains the norm.

Yet, the report is careful to emphasise that the contemporary threat to press freedom is not limited to physical violence. Increasingly, repression operates through what FSC identifies as “lawfare”—the strategic deployment of legal frameworks to intimidate, harass, and incapacitate journalists. In this paradigm, the law is not merely an instrument of justice but a mechanism of control. Criminal provisions, anti-terror laws, defamation suits, and regulatory processes are mobilised not necessarily to secure convictions, but to entangle journalists in protracted legal battles that drain resources, erode morale, and ultimately silence dissent. The process itself becomes punitive.

It is within this framework that the cases of Rupesh Kumar Singh and Irfan Mehraj acquire particular significance.

Rupesh Kumar Singh: Incarceration as extended punishment

Through Ipsa Shatakshi’s deeply personal account, FSC offers a rare and intimate glimpse into the lived experience of a journalist’s incarceration—not only from the perspective of the detainee but from that of the family left behind. Rupesh Kumar Singh, known for his uncompromising reporting on state violence and the marginalisation of Adivasi communities in Jharkhand, has been imprisoned since July 17, 2022, under the UAPA. His work, which exposed alleged excesses committed in the name of anti-Naxal operations, placed him in direct confrontation with state narratives.

What emerges from Shatakshi’s account is a pattern that goes beyond mere detention. Rupesh’s incarceration has been marked by a series of punitive administrative decisions: multiple cases filed in succession, repeated transfers across prisons in Jharkhand and Bihar, and prolonged confinement in high-security cells typically reserved for the most dangerous offenders. These measures, FSC suggests, are not incidental but deliberately designed to isolate, disorient, and weaken.

The material conditions described are stark. Solitary confinement, inadequate nutrition, lack of proper medical care, and a monotonous, nutritionally deficient diet point to systemic neglect, if not outright cruelty. The description of inmates being served the same vegetable—jackfruit or radish—for days on end is emblematic of a deeper disregard for dignity within the prison system.

Equally significant is the impact on the family. Shatakshi’s inability to communicate with her husband for extended periods, the bureaucratic opacity of prison authorities, and the sheer logistical difficulty of arranging prison visits across distant locations together create a regime of extended punishment. FSC underscores that in such cases, incarceration is not confined to the individual—it radiates outward, affecting families, relationships, and support networks.

Irfan Mehraj: Pre-trial detention and the silencing of Kashmir’s narrative

The account of Irfan Mehraj presents a complementary but distinct dimension of the same phenomenon. Arrested on March 20, 2023, by the National Investigation Agency after being summoned for questioning, Mehraj has spent over three years in pre-trial detention, with proceedings yet to meaningfully commence. His case exemplifies a central feature of UAPA prosecutions: the inversion of the presumption of innocence through stringent bail conditions and indefinite delays.

Mehraj, a journalist deeply engaged with Kashmir’s political, cultural, and human rights landscape, was not merely reporting events but documenting lived realities—particularly allegations of torture and state violence. His work with the Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS) and his role in producing meticulous human rights documentation positioned him as a critical voice in a region already marked by intense contestation.

FSC situates Mehraj’s arrest within the broader transformation of Kashmir’s media environment, especially following the abrogation of Article 370 in 2019 and the introduction of the 2020 media policy. Journalists in the region now operate under pervasive surveillance, with routine summons, interrogations, and implicit threats forming part of their professional landscape. The boundaries between reporting, dissent, and criminality have become increasingly blurred.

The personal consequences of Mehraj’s detention are equally severe. Lodged in Delhi’s Rohini prison, far from his home in Srinagar, he remains physically cut off from his family, including a father in declining health and a spouse with whom he had barely begun his married life. The structure of prison mulaqats—conducted through glass partitions and intercoms—further underscores the emotional distance imposed by the system.

FSC also highlights the broader chilling effect of such arrests. Mehraj’s detention sent ripples across the Kashmiri media community, reinforcing a climate of fear and self-censorship. Statements of concern from national and international organisations—including journalists’ bodies and human rights groups—contrast sharply with the silence of many mainstream media institutions within India, a silence that FSC implicitly critiques.

UAPA and the normalisation of exceptional power

A recurring thread across both accounts is the role of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act as a central instrument in the state’s approach to dissent. FSC’s report engages critically with the law’s expansive scope, arguing that it enables the state to construct broad and often ambiguous categories of “threat,” within which journalists, activists, and human rights defenders can be easily subsumed.

Crucially, FSC points out that while convictions under UAPA remain relatively rare, the law’s true power lies elsewhere—in its ability to justify prolonged detention, delay trials, and effectively remove individuals from public life. The legal process, in this sense, becomes indistinguishable from punishment. Years lost in incarceration, professional disruption, and social isolation achieve what formal convictions may not.

Memory as resistance

The report concludes on a note that is both sombre and quietly defiant. In the face of systemic silencing, what remains is memory—the act of remembering those who have been removed from public discourse. As one of Mehraj’s colleagues poignantly observes, remembering political prisoners becomes a form of resistance in itself.

Through its detailed documentation and narrative depth, the Free Speech Collective does more than chronicle individual injustices. It exposes a pattern—one in which violence, law, and institutional inertia converge to create an environment where journalism itself becomes a risky, even punishable act. The stories of Rupesh Kumar Singh and Irfan Mehraj are not outliers; they are emblematic of a broader democratic unravelling.

On a day meant to celebrate the ideals of a free press, FSC’s intervention serves as a sobering counterpoint. It forces a reckoning with a difficult truth: that in contemporary India, the freedom to report, to question, and to dissent is increasingly contingent, fragile, and, for some, altogether absent.

Related:

J & K: Attempt to muzzle FoE, Media? Police summons to media, journalists

“This system breaks the body when it cannot break the spirit” — Ipsa Shatakshi on her jailed husband, journalist Rupesh Kumar Singh

How the noose tightened: understanding modus operandi of killers who took the life of journalist-activist, Gauri Lankesh

Journalists’ bodies strongly condemn sedition charges against Siddharth Varadarajan, Karan Thapar of The Wire

The post Caged Voices, Silenced Truths: FSC’s expansive indictment of India’s press freedom crisis appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The following report synthesises five harrowing accounts of caste-based hate, meticulously documenting how the intersection of social dominance, administrative apathy, and ritual purity continues to deny the Dalit community their fundamental right to life and liberty.

Dalit youth found dead in Tamil Nadu after going missing; family alleges killing linked to inter-caste relationship

Tamil Nadu (Pudukkottai)

On April 21, in Nadupatti village of Kulathur taluk in Pudukkottai district, 20-year-old R. Hariharan, a Dalit youth, went missing after receiving a phone call. Two days later, on April 23, villagers grazing cattle near a forest area found a body floating in a water-filled quarry. The body was identified as Hariharan.

Hariharan had been in a relationship with a 19-year-old girl belonging to a dominant caste. Around five months earlier, the couple had attempted to elope. Following this, both families were called to Keeranur police station, where a compromise was reached and the couple was separated.

After the recovery of the body, Vellanur police registered a case under Section 194 of the BNSS on April 24, treating it as a suspicious death, based on a complaint filed by Hariharan’s father, P. Rajkumar (50). The family refused to accept the body and demanded that a murder case be registered. A post-mortem examination was conducted, and the body was handed over to the family on April 27.

Hariharan’s father, P. Rajkumar, stated that “The murder was committed by the family members of the girl belonging to another caste, because Hariharan had a love affair with her” as The Mooknayak reported

On April 25, the FIR was altered to include Section 108 (abetment of suicide) of the BNS and Section 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act. The accused named in the FIR include the girl’s father Rajendran, her brother Shanmugasundaram, and another person, Krishnan.

The case is currently being investigated by the Pudukkottai town Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP).

Members of Dalit community asked to bring their own plates & water for temple

Gujarat (Junagadh)

On April 29, during the Pran Pratishta ceremony of a Ram temple in Bhutadi village of Visavadar taluk in Junagadh district, members of the Dalit community were invited to participate in the event.

Approximately ten Dalit individuals were invited by the organising committee. However, the invitation included conditions requiring them to eat separately after others had finished and to bring their own plates and glasses.

They were also told that “Bring your own plates and glasses from home… stay outside the temple premises during the core rituals” as reported by The Mooknayak

Ajay Chatur Boricha, aged 25, filed an FIR at Visavadar police station regarding the conditions imposed. Following this, members of the Dalit community refused to attend the event. The planned mass feast in the village was cancelled, while the temple consecration ceremony proceeded as scheduled. Police registered a case against five individuals: Babu Uka Hapani, Narendra Bhanji Siroya, Ramnik Samji Sorathia, Atul Bhikha Siroya, and Phula Popat Siroya. The case was registered under relevant sections of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and the BNS, 2023.

Newly married Dalit couple were allegedly denied entry in temple

Madhya Pradesh (Khargone)

On April 26, in Khargone district, a Dalit couple, Nirmal Kanade and his wife, attempted to enter a Hanuman temple to offer prayers. The temple was initially found locked. After police intervention, the couple was allowed entry. Following this, a panchayat consisting of members from the Banjara and Patel communities held a meeting.

The panchayat declared a social boycott against the couple and two other Dalit families associated with them.

According to the New Indian Express, The decision included a financial penalty.

“The panchayat announced that anyone engaging with the three families or selling anything to them would have to pay a penalty of Rs 11,000” as reported

Following the announcement, local shopkeepers stopped selling goods to the affected families. Nirmal Kanade shared a video describing the situation and seeking assistance. Police later intervened and stated that the matter had been resolved through discussions, and restrictions were lifted.

“Now, Dalits will also take out wedding processions riding a buggy” remark against Dalit wedding procession

Uttar Pradesh (Shahjahanpur)

On April 20, in Lai Kheda village under Tilhar police station area in Shahjahanpur district, a wedding procession arrived from Bareilly at a Dalit household. During the procession, a local individual, Rajpal Yadav, made a remark that now Dalits will also take out wedding processions riding a buggy.

Following this remark, an argument took place which escalated into a physical clash between groups.

Police stated that two processions had reached the same location at the same time, contributing to the situation. An FIR was registered against Rajpal Yadav and four others under provisions of the BNS and the SC/ST Act.

Two individuals were detained in connection with the incident, as reported.

Dalit youth dies after assault at Amreli hospital canteen following dispute over leftover food and caste inquiry

Gujarat (Amreli)

On April 20, at Shantaba General Hospital in Amreli district, 24-year-old Mahesh Premji Rathore from Gopalgram village died after being assaulted. Mahesh had been at the hospital to care for his 70-year-old uncle. While eating at a free canteen, he felt unwell and threw away a portion of leftover food. The canteen operator, Bharat Acharya, demanded a fine of Rs 50 for wasting food. When Mahesh gave a Rs 500 note, Acharya refused to return the change and questioned him about his caste and village.

After learning that Mahesh belonged to a Dalit community, Acharya and others allegedly assaulted him using plastic pipes. Mahesh lost consciousness and died three days later.

According to The Mooknayak His father, Premji Rathore, stated:

“My son was killed for a mere 50 rupees. He was beaten with plastic pipes until he stopped breathing… we will not take the body until murder charges are filed against all accused.”

The family refused to accept the body until appropriate charges were filed. The Special Atrocity Court sought a Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report to determine whether Section 302 (murder) should be applied or not.

Notably, across incidents reported from Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, and Uttar Pradesh, a pattern of caste-based discrimination, violence, and exclusion continues to be recorded in different forms. These cases involve restrictions on access to public spaces, conditions imposed during community events, social boycott, and physical violence following everyday actions such as relationships, temple entry, or participation in social functions. The recurrence of such incidents across regions indicates ongoing concerns regarding the implementation of legal protections and safeguards available under existing laws, including provisions addressing caste-based offences.

While FIRs, arrests, and investigations have been reported in these cases, the sequence of events indicates that such incidents continue to occur within society despite the availability of stringent laws against offenders.

Related

The Double Stage on Campus: Caste, crisis & UGC equity regulations (2026) controversy

An Adivasi woman once in bonded labour now serves her village as a Sarpanch

Telangana: Stop forcible ‘re-location of Chenchu Adivasis from Amrabad Tiger Reserve

The post Systematic Exclusion: Caste-based atrocities across Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, MP, and UP appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Trade unions all over the world were gearing up to observe the centenary, so also CITU. Janam decided to do a play to commemorate this occasion and to take the legacy of May Day to workers. Safdar wrote a play called Mai Divas Ki Kahani (‘The Saga of May Day’).

It dramatized three historic moments: the trial of the May Day martyrs in Chicago in 1886; the 1905 parade in Russia, based on Brecht’s May Day scene from The Mother; and May Day in Nazi Germany.

While the play was successful, it was hard to do – not for any other reason but simply because Janam didn’t have enough actors available, even though it was written such that it could be done with only six actors. Safdar sought to compensate for the lack of actors with innovative use of properties, including masks.

Mai Divas is probably one of Janam’s most visually interesting street plays, using nearly ninety different pieces of properties in an intricate choreography of who picks up what object from where in the circle, and keeps it down where. And workers watched the play with great interest, even though it told stories from long ago, and had characters with names unfamiliar to Indian workers. What connected, however, was the shared experience of exploitation and the struggle against it.

A couple of years later, in 1988, a Dutch theatre scholar, Eugene van Erven, visited India. He sought out Safdar and the two became friends. Eugene van Erven’s interview with Safdar (reproduced in Theatre of the Streets) is an invaluable resource for the street theatre activists and historians. Safdar invited him to the May Day performances that Janam did that year, at dawn, at the Swatantra Bharat Mill in West Delhi. Eugene van Erven took some beautiful photos of the performance, including the one below, where you see Safdar speaking before the performance.

I sometimes think that this photograph, with all the posters and the notices on blackboards, is itself source material for labour historians!

Courtesy: https://sudu26.substack.com

The post May Day Dramatised appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Declaring on March 31, 2026, that the Maoist insurgency in central India had been defeated after six decades, Union Home Minister Amit Shah announced the redeployment of battle-hardened Central Armed Police Forces from Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Odisha, promising to end insurgency in the hills before the 2029 general elections.

Shah described the period since Narendra Modi became Prime Minister in 2014 as a golden era for internal security, covering Kashmir and the north-east alongside the defeat of left-wing extremism.

Shah has not indicated how he intends to help the Manipur government resolve the crisis that continues to grip the state, where more than 260 people were killed, mostly Christian Kuki-Zo, over 300 churches and some 10,000 houses destroyed, and a lakh of persons displaced. Around 60,000 shelter in churches and private refuges in the hills where the Kuki-Zo have lived for generations; several hundred others are scattered across Delhi, Bangalore, Shillong and Guwahati as migrant workers.

The violence began on May 3, 2023, in the Meitei-dominated valley with arson and sexual assault. Political groups loyal to then Chief Minister Biren Singh paraded through the streets alongside police as naked women, just raped, were forced to walk in public view.

Singh, compelled to resign on February 9, 2025, has not reconciled to his removal and is considered still capable of manipulating volatile public opinion; he is also allegedly in the know of the drug economy that underpins instability in this border state.

For the Kuki-Zo still in relief camps or rented accommodation in Delhi, Bangalore, Shillong and Guwahati — dispossessed, un-rehabilitated, watching the third anniversary of their ethnic cleansing pass with no arrest for rape or murder — the prospect of more boots in Manipur carries a particular, bitter meaning.

More than 270 lives have been lost since May 3, 2023, including several central and state force personnel. Not one person has been convicted.

The CRPF, the force being redeployed from Chhattisgarh, is the same force that on April 7, 2026, fired on civilian protesters in Bishnupur district, killing three. More men and weapons — without accountability, without justice, without rehabilitation — is not a peace plan.

The immediate political crisis is in Imphal. COCOMI, the most powerful Meitei civil society umbrella body, announced in mid-April a complete boycott of the BJP in Manipur, appealing to the public to refuse to participate in any party activities and demanding a statement from Chief Minister Yumnam Khemchand Singh on his government’s failure to protect civilians.

On April 25, after a statewide shutdown and processions from multiple Imphal neighbourhoods, a COCOMI delegation submitted a seven-point memorandum, warning: “We will not be submitting a memorandum anymore after this.”

The seven demands — abrogating the Suspension of Operations agreement with Kuki-Zo armed groups, updating the National Register of Citizens, securing accountability for killings since May 2023, ending narco-terrorism, and ensuring accountability for the Tronglaobi deaths — reflect Meitei political grievances.

What the Meitei group is pressing for is not justice for Kuki-Zo rape survivors but the elimination of Kuki underground groups and the exclusion of alleged illegal immigrants from Myanmar who are kin tribes of the Kuki-Zo.

The two communities’ definitions of justice are irreconcilable without political mediation that has yet to arrive. A Kuki-Zo political bloc of ten MLAs — seven of them BJP members — has said it will not re-enter government without written commitments on a separate administration.

For 864 days after violence began, Prime Minister Narendra Modi did not visit Manipur, speaking of the crisis for the first time only on July 20, 2023, more than two months after it erupted.

He finally visited on September 13, 2025 — a three-hour trip to Churachandpur, headquarters of the Kuki region, and Imphal. He promised housing for internally displaced persons without specifying location or timeline, since the return of Kuki tribals to the valley depends on talks that remain inconclusive.

Congress general secretary Priyanka Gandhi Vadra responded: “It is unfortunate that he allowed this to go on for so long, with so many killed and so much strife, before deciding to visit. That has not been the tradition of Prime Ministers in India.”

The government officially confirmed 58,821 displaced persons in 174 relief camps, 7,894 permanent houses destroyed and 2,646 partially destroyed. It had promised all displaced would return home by March 31, 2026.

That deadline passed without a single return. The Kuki-Zo cannot return to the Imphal valley — their homes no longer exist or are occupied by others. National highways between the hills and the valley function, in effect, as ethnic frontlines, with members of both communities unable to cross safely into each other’s areas.

Human rights defender Babloo Loitongbam, himself a Meitei who faced assault and threats for speaking out, stated: “Thousands are still unable to return home — not by choice, but due to ongoing fear and insecurity. Numerous homes have been destroyed, while others remain occupied by vigilante groups, making return impossible without proper state intervention and guarantees of safety.”

Amnesty International India’s chair Aakar Patel said in May 2025: “It is unacceptable that the Indian government has failed to address the humanitarian needs and implement a rehabilitation policy for displaced communities who remain in relief camps two years since the ethnic violence began. This inaction has left tens of thousands in limbo, forced to endure life in inhumane conditions with no end in sight.”

The thousands of Kuki-Zo in Delhi, Shillong and Bangalore receive no official recognition as internally displaced persons and have no status under any central government scheme. Their children are enrolled wherever schools will accept them; their elders are dying far from their ancestral villages. The Kuki Students’ Organisation, Delhi and NCR, has functioned as a government in exile — maintaining documentation, filing petitions, holding vigils at the Constitution Club — with no other institution stepping forward for them.

The single most damning fact, at the start of the fourth year, is that no one has been convicted for any act of violence, murder, rape or arson committed since May 3, 2023.

The Supreme Court expressed shock at the fourteen-day delay in registering a Zero FIR for two women stripped, paraded naked and gang-raped by a mob whose perpetrators were clearly visible in a viral video circulated in July 2023.

One of those survivors, aged eighteen at the time of the assault, spent nearly three years moving between hospital wards in Guwahati. She died on January 10, 2026, aged approximately twenty, from injuries sustained during the violence.

Aakar Patel said: “This woman’s death is a devastating indictment of the Indian state’s continuing failure to deliver timely justice to survivors of sexual violence.” Committee on Tribal Unity spokesman Ng. Lun Kipgen noted: “Our brave girl survived the violence, but not the silence.” No perpetrator has been arrested. No senior police officer has faced disciplinary proceedings for the delay in filing the FIR or for failing to pursue the investigation.

The Wire’s investigative correspondent Greeshma Kuthar stated: “The Arambai Tenggol led mobs to Kuki-Zo villages that were burnt down, killed people and slaughtered them. There are FIRs naming them as accused in sexual assault of Kuki-Zo women. There are viral videos of their members beheading people — with no consequences.” No Arambai Tenggol leader has been arrested. Neither the central government nor Manipur state officials condemned the group’s violence.

The PUCL Independent People’s Tribunal, chaired by former Supreme Court judge Justice Kurian Joseph, released its report in August 2025 after taking testimony across Manipur and Delhi over more than a year. It documented survivors’ deep-rooted belief that the state either allowed the violence to happen or actively participated in it.

Many deponents attributed the killings to the political and administrative decisions of former Chief Minister Biren Singh. The jury recorded its disturbance at the brutality — people killed, butchered, tortured, dismembered, disrobed and sexually assaulted in public, their suffering then displayed on social media.

Audio evidence submitted to the court suggested that Singh had prior knowledge of the village attacks. The government’s own Commission of Inquiry, headed by former Guwahati High Court Chief Justice Ajai Lamba (he resigned and was replaced by retired Supreme Court judge Balbir Singh Chauhan as chair in February 2026), has had its mandate extended multiple times and now runs to May 2026.

The Supreme Court’s observation of an “absolute breakdown of law and order,” its shock at police delays in registering FIRs for sexual violence, and its orders transferring certain cases to the CBI produced documentation but not accountability.

The International Crisis Group, in its February 2025 report, called on New Delhi to urgently address the Kuki-Zo demand for a separate administration, noting that the constitutional precedent already exists in the autonomous district councils of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram. That call has not been answered.

More CRPF battalions were present in Manipur on May 3, 2023, than in most Indian states. They did not stop the burning of churches in Churachandpur. They did not prevent the looting of police armouries. By October 2023, an estimated 6,000 weapons and 600,000 rounds of ammunition had been seized, along with mortars, grenades and police uniforms, of which only approximately a quarter had been recovered. They did not arrest Arambai Tenggol commanders. On April 7, 2026, they fired on Meitei protesters in Bishnupur, killing three. Armed force, without political will or accountability structures, does not resolve ethnic conflict.

Benjamin Mate, chairman of the Kuki Organisation for Human Rights Trust, has stated what justice requires: “The Government of India must appoint an independent commission to thoroughly investigate the role of senior officials, state bureaucrats, police officials and armed groups during the ethnic violence. Accountability is essential, and only through a transparent and impartial inquiry can justice be delivered to the victims. By consistently failing to hold those suspected of serious human rights violations accountable, the government risks signalling that impunity will persist — ultimately paving the way for further abuses.”

Courtesy: India Currents

The post Manipur Year 4: Guns Without Justice appeared first on SabrangIndia.

According to these reports, the victim, identified as Ayaan Saifi, was an only child who was pursuing his studies while also helping his mother with daily work, according to family members.

The tragic incident took place near a local park in Trilokpuri, a densely populated working-class locality in East Delhi that has witnessed tensions and violent clashes in the past. Eyewitnesses and relatives allege that a group of 6 to 8 men entered the park armed with knives and chased Ayaan before attacking him.

“They surrounded him and stabbed him repeatedly, in the back, stomach, and legs. Even his hand was badly injured,” a relative who claimed to have witnessed the incident said as reported by the media. The family has alleged that the attack was premeditated and linked to an earlier dispute involving a local individual, referred to as “Vakil.” They claim Ayaan had no direct involvement in the matter but was targeted regardless.

“He had no enmity with anyone. They killed him over someone else’s issue,” a family member said. Ayaan was rushed to Lal Bahadur Shastri Hospital in critical condition. According to the family, he briefly regained consciousness during which his statement was recorded by the police.

“He named several attackers. The police recorded everything on video,” a relative alleged, adding that family members were initially not allowed to meet him inside the hospital.

The family further claimed that Ayaan had received threats in the past and that a complaint had been filed months earlier, but no preventive action was taken.

Ayaan Faizi sustained serious stab injuries in East Delhi’s Trilokpuri late on Thursday night. Reports stated that, according to the police, information about the incident was received at the Mayur Vihar police station around 10 pm, following which a team rushed to the hospital where the victim was admitted. After initial treatment, he was shifted to the AIIMS Trauma Centre for advanced care.

Further, police forces stated that preliminary inquiry revealed that the victim, along with a complainant, was near his residence in Trilokpuri when two persons attacked him with knives.Based on the complainant’s statement and medical examination, a case has been registered under relevant sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and an investigation has been initiated.

The police have also stated that both accused had been identified and teams are conducting continuous raids to apprehend them. “Technical surveillance, CCTV footage analysis and local intelligence are being utilised to ensure their early arrest,” an officer said. Further investigation is underway, the police said.

Related:

As lynchings “normalise” in ‘New India, a Bihar imam is ‘thrashed, pushed’ from train to die in Bareilly

Bihar under BJP: Hate attacks against Muslims spiral, one dies

The post Delhi: Ayaan Saifi, a 16-year old, stabbed to death in nation’s capital on April 30 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Residents have also accused the state power department of pushing the rollout as part of a broader privatisation drive, while protestors have demanded a halt to the installations until their concerns about billing transparency and affordability are addressed. Protests have been witnessed in Ferozabad, Lucknow, Meerut, Agra, Kanpur, Haamirpur, Banda and Hapur indicating w widespread public backlash on the question. Protesters allege that these metres have been programmed to run fast leading to inflated electricity bills. Due to the protests, installation of these pre-paid smart metres has been temporarily suspended or stopped.

Officials have acknowledged growing resistance in multiple areas, with demonstrations continuing in towns and villages as authorities attempt to manage the escalating situation.

A wave of protests against smart electricity meters is intensifying across #UttarPradesh, with women emerging at the forefront of the agitation. In #Firozabad, women took to the streets in large numbers, in some cases removing installed meters and throwing them onto roads, as… pic.twitter.com/BXRruL9ZZf

— News9 (@News9Tweets) April 30, 2026

Related:

Villagers in UP claim their bills have doubled due to smart meters throw them in protest

The post UP: Women protest installation of prepaid smart electricity metres in several districts appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Reportedly, Tausif Raza Mazhari’s wife, Tabassum Khatoon, said her husband called her around 10.30pm on April 26 informing her that fellow passengers were beating him and accusing him of stealing. Soon after, the phone was switched off.

The TOI has, according to news reports, accessed the autopsy report which mentions five injuries on the face, shoulder and chest. Besides, his skull and all ribs were fractured. The report stated that the cause of death was haemorrhagic shock and coma. It is crucial to note that the spate of lynch killings that began with the brute beating to death, in Maharashtra’s Pune of Mohsin Shaikh (a computer engineer) days after the swearing in of the first Modi government in May 2014 has continued virtually unabated since.

In case of the Bareilly lynching that reportedly took place on May 26 and took the national media six days to publish, initially, police noted the death as an accident. The imam was identified with the help of his Aadhaar card, and the body was sent for post-mortem. This too has been a pattern, with the violent targeting of Muslim individuals, especially young men and clerics being “passed off or recorded” as accidents!

It was only after some media and social media reportage that the Bareilly police reportedly issued a fresh statement on the death of Mazhari, saying “necessary legal action” will be taken. This was after his family specifically gave evidence of assault.

Video of Video published on the social media handle of Observer Post:

This case cannot be separated from the climate it exists in. What Tabassum Khatoon describes is not just an assault, it reflects a deeper and dangerous pattern.

Maulana Tousif Raza Mazhari was not just attacked, he was accused of being a thief, a label that has repeatedly been… pic.twitter.com/GlugI6q3vS

— Meer Faisal (@meerfaisal001) April 30, 2026

Social media posts show widespread protests in Thakurganj, Bihar where a cndle march was held demanding justice for Maulana Tousif Raza Mazhari, the 30 year old cleric whose body was found near the railway tracks in Bareilly on April 26.

In Thakurganj of Bihar, a candle march was held demanding justice for Maulana Tousif Raza Mazhari. He was a 30-year-old cleric whose body was found near railway tracks in Bareilly on April 26, 2026. While authorities have described the death as possibly accidental, his family… pic.twitter.com/hYqbzXJ4PJ

— The Observer Post (@TheObserverPost) May 1, 2026

It was only after an audio recording of the call was widely circulated online, that the UP police launched a deeper investigation. In the 32-second audio, Mazhari was heard purportedly saying: “Tabassum, call the cops immediately, these people are thrashing me badly.”

Tabassum said on Friday, May 1 as reported by the media “When I told my husband to seek help from other passengers, he replied that no one came forward to help.”

SP (City) Manush Pareek reportedly told the Times of India that, “Mazhari was heading from Bareilly to Siwan. On April 27, GRP was informed about the abandoned body. Initially, it was claimed that the man fell from the train. The audio is under scrutiny. We have assured the family that an FIR would be lodged.”

Another police representative, the Bareilly Junction GRP SHO Sushil Kumar said that Raza was travelling to Siwan on a general ticket. Since the body was found within Bareilly Cantonment police station limits, jurisdiction lies with local police. GRP has no direct involvement; all further investigation will be handled by local authorities concerned.

Related:

Bihar under BJP: Hate attacks against Muslims spiral, one dies

Haldwani: Police allege planned mob attack, as local Muslims state police harassing and detaining family members without evidence

The post As lynchings “normalise” in ‘New India, a Bihar imam is ‘thrashed, pushed’ from train to die in Bareilly appeared first on SabrangIndia.