An action research report, “Invited Disaster: Khadi Floods in Surat City”, published by two civil rights groups, Paryavaran Suraksha Samiti and the People’s Union for Civil Liberties, Surat, states that nearly half of Gujarat’s top urban conglomerate—known for its concentration of textile and diamond polishing industries—is affected by the dumping of debris and solid waste, along with the release of treated and untreated sewage into the khadis (rivulets), thereby increasing the risk of flood disaster.

Conducted by two post-graduate students from Azim Premji University, Avadhut Atre and Buddhavikas Athawale, with assistance from environmental lawyer Krishnakant Chauhan, architect Sugeet Pathakji, environmentalist Rohit Prajapati, and urban planner Neha Sarwate, the study is based on field observations of the khadis passing through the South Gujarat town.

Using available secondary data, the study corroborates and confirms observed changes in these rivulets—intended as natural stormwater drainage channels for the urban area—through historical satellite images from Google Earth and interviews with stakeholders.

According to the study, authorized and unauthorized constructions, land reclamation along khadis, and resectioning and remodeling of khadi flows have severely compromised their capacity to carry stormwater. “In many areas in Surat city, smaller natural waterways have been levelled and converted into roads to facilitate traffic flow, overlooking the critical need for smooth stormwater drainage,” it asserts.

The study notes, “It can be said that the rainwater falling in city areas is unable to exit due to the ‘development’ of the city. The flooding of khadis impacts the eastern part of Surat city, affecting over 50% of Surat’s population. The textile trade also suffers during flooding, leading to economic losses.”

It estimates that khadi floods affect East Zone A, East Zone B, South East Zone, South Zone, and South West Zone, which collectively house approximately 43,75,207 of Surat’s total 82,32,085 residents.

More alarmingly, the study points out that the khadis are fed by discharges from sewage treatment plants. Moreover, numerous illegal outlets release both domestic and industrial effluents into the khadis. In fact, the city’s expanding periphery contributes untreated sewage into these waterways.

Containing a large collection of Google Earth images—compared from 2011 through 2025—of several rivulets such as Mithi Khadi, Koyali Khadi, Bhedwad Khadi, and Kankara Khadi, the study criticizes the Surat Municipal Corporation (SMC) for undertaking desilting as part of pre-monsoon preparedness “without due caution,” which, it claims, harms floodplain areas and reduces the capacity of the khadis to handle excess monsoon water.

One such example is a bridge over Mithi Khadi, now surrounded by a high wall over land that previously acted as a floodplain. Landfilling has raised the terrain above the natural flood level, pushing water toward other low-lying areas. “The obstruction around the bridge hampers smooth flow of water during the monsoon,” the report says.

The study further observes that construction and reclamation have reduced floodplain areas and the width of khadi stretches. Dumping and landfilling have drastically altered the elevation profile. At one site, a compound wall built in 2018 has resulted in the khadi being embanked by a concrete wall, shrinking its original area.

At another site, textile waste is directly dumped into the khadi, while accumulated solid waste and soil significantly hinder water flow. “A sewage outlet was observed discharging domestic and chemical wastewater—particularly from nearby units—into the khadi.”

Focusing on Koyali Khadi, the report notes that road construction over it restricts natural water dispersion, causing severe waterlogging in the surrounding areas during monsoon. Particularly concerning is the ongoing project from Bhathena Naher bridge to Jeevan Jyot bridge, where the khadi is being fully concretized, drastically reducing its natural capacity.

The researchers warn, “With little to no space for excess water to flow or merge into other channels, this development poses a high risk of urban flooding and long-term stagnation during monsoons.” They add that the silt removed during desilting is often dumped on the banks, only to wash back into the khadi during heavy rain.

A comparative analysis of Google satellite imagery from 2011 to 2025 at Saniya Hemad village, located on Surat’s fringe, reveals “a noticeable alteration in the khadi’s flow pattern.” The 2011 image shows a naturally meandering khadi, while the 2025 image reveals a straightened course.

“Although this engineered modification may appear efficient in the short term, it shortens flow duration and reduces water retention, diminishing both ecological and flood-buffering functions,” the researchers highlight.

Near the Raghuvir Trade Market on Bhavani Road, earlier imagery showed a visible khadi flow, which by 2025 has vanished due to construction. Built-up structures over the khadi’s path have obstructed this natural drainage, increasing the risk of urban flooding.

Examining the impact of development on water flow, the study notes that the Bhedwad Khadi followed a wider, more continuous path in 2011. By 2025, construction near Bamroli cricket ground has narrowed its course and reduced its flow capacity.

It adds that near the Dindoli Water Treatment Plant, the Bhedwad Khadi’s course has been significantly altered and straightened for aesthetic reasons, severely compromising its natural flow.

In the area around Om Industrial Estate in Saroli, researchers found the khadi’s path constantly shifting. Its older flow, once almost gone, reappeared in 2025 imagery. “Taming a khadi and constructing concrete embankments drastically alters its natural behavior,” they say, “leading to unintended consequences such as heavy silt accumulation.”

At the Kankara biodiversity park, a 2016 image shows the right bank of Kankara Khadi concretized with a diaphragm wall. The park and a road were built by raising the land level. By 2025, both banks have diaphragm walls, eliminating the khadi’s natural meander and floodplains.

Further, near Gabheni village on the city outskirts, the khadi’s course has changed due to drastic land use alterations. “Legal and illegal shrimp farms have contributed to this change. Industrial waste dumping here has led to severe water and soil pollution,” the report adds.

During fieldwork, most respondents identified poor stormwater drainage as the key issue. “Drains are too narrow, broken, or absent in some areas,” the study says. These are further clogged by solid waste, particularly plastic, discarded by residents and industries.

Shopkeepers highlighted the lack of regular SMC clean-up. They reported repeated losses during monsoon, as inventories are damaged and earnings suffer. Businesses shut down for days due to prolonged water stagnation.

In low-lying markets, encroachment on khadi banks and lack of flood management lead to backflow during heavy rainfall. Locals noted a rise in unseasonal rains, aggravating waterlogging. Builders acknowledged that unplanned urbanization has severely disrupted the city’s hydrology.

“Residents, particularly near Koyali and Mithi khadi, emphasized the interlinkage among the khadis. When Kankara Khadi overflows, water backflows into Mithi Khadi, causing flooding in homes. This is devastating in low-lying areas with poor housing,” the study notes.

“Loss of income is the most immediate impact,” residents report. For shopkeepers and daily wage earners, flooding forces closures for several days. One woman said, “I am the sole earner. When it floods, work halts for 4–5 days. My shop remains shut for a week. We then rely on SMC for food and water.”

Mobility is another major issue. Waterlogged streets restrict access to work and healthcare. Children miss school, and both public and private transport becomes unreliable due to submerged roads.

The report concludes by stressing health risks. Waterborne diseases like fever, diarrhea, and skin infections, along with vector-borne diseases like dengue and malaria, increase after khadi floods. Residents mentioned rising medical expenses, adding strain to financially stressed households. “Stagnant water near homes, especially by khadi banks, becomes mosquito breeding grounds, worsening health conditions,” it warns.

Courtesy: CounterView

The post Unchecked urbanisation, waste dumping: Study warns of ‘invited disaster’ as khadi floods threaten half of Surat appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Targeted Violence in April and May

In the months of April and May, CJP documented 180 instances of targeted violence against Indian Muslims post the Pahalgam attack. Of these, 77 took place in April, and 103 in May. These spanned from outright cases of murder (3 specific instances, 3 victims) to nearly 99 cases of hate speech (made by politicians, proponents of Hindutva and other individuals and organisations with affiliations to the Hindu-right). The attacks spiked between April 23 and 25 (10, 12 and 18 cases respectively), following a near-steady course of events right through May. The following is a visualisation of this pattern of violence across the month.

Graph representing number of incidences of communal violence in relation to time

CJP is dedicated to finding and bringing to light instances of Hate Speech, so that the bigots propagating these venomous ideas can be unmasked and brought to justice. To learn more about our campaign against hate speech, please become a member. To support our initiatives, please donate now!

These attacks were spread out across India, as demonstrated by this map – although they were majorly spatially concentrated in northern and central India – with Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Haryana being the 5 worst offenders – with 29, 28, 22, 21 and 10 instances respectively.

Pie-chart representing the percentage of targeted violence per-state

Many (at least 66 out of 180 incidents had the assailants referring to the Pahalgam attack or accusing the victims of allegiance to Pakistan, thus directly relating it to the same and the state’s narrativisation of the violence – thus bringing up the percentage to 36.66%. This does not obviously include incidents which did not have the perpetrators bringing up the attack or alluding some association to it, although, in most cases one can make the assumption that the spike in attacks is related to the perception of the attack) of these incidents were direct outcomes of the Pahalgam attack, with many of the perpetrators citing it as the reason for the same.

A chilling example would be the video of a man claiming responsibility for the killing of a young Muslim man, who was shot dead near a restaurant located on Shilpgram Road in Tajganj police station area, in Agra, Uttar Pradesh. The man in the video identifies himself as a member of ‘Kshatriya Gauraksha Dal’. “Bharat Mata ki saugandh, 26 ka badla agar 2,600 se na liya toh mei Bharat Mata ka putr nahi, Jai shri Ram, Jai Hindu Rashtra, Bharat Mata ki Jai”, the man is heard saying. The two men have knives and a pistol tucked inside their waist. Reacting to the viral video, Agra Police said, “Regarding the viral video on social media, it is to be informed that no organization named Kshatriya Gau Raksha Dal is working in Agra.”

This recent spike in attacks on India’s religious minorities must be contextualized — there is an establishment of a “new normal”. This systemic violent targeting of India’s Muslims (and Christians) can be traced back to 2014, when a new avatar of the Bharatiya Janata Party assumed control at the centre. The Centre for Study of Society and Secularism writes, “Historically, communal riots often involved groups from two religious communities clashing, with both sides inflicting and suffering losses … However, in recent years, the nature of larger riots has shifted. Instead of clashes between two communities, many significant riots now involve state actions disproportionately targeting the Muslim community. These actions include using bulldozers to demolish properties owned by Muslims, causing significant economic damage. Additionally, the state has slapped cases and implicated the members of the Muslim community, even in instances where they are victims of violence during communal riots. The disproportionate and seemingly one-sided state action has led to social discord, communal consciousness, and polarization. This atmosphere of communal tension has been steadily intensifying over recent years. For instance, the Pew Research Center, a respected research institution, categorized India in 2022 as “very high” on its Social Hostilities Index (SHI), with a score of 9.3. Social hostilities index (SHI) factors in levels of religion-related harassment, mob violence, terrorism, militant activity, and conflicts over religious conversions or the use of religious symbols and attire.” This also tracks with the India Hate Lab report, which stated that there was a 74.4% surge in hate speech in 2024, driven by the BJP, Hindutva outfits, and unchecked social media amplification.

Media, politics, and the act of communalisation

India has noticed a growing entrenchment of the systematisation of communalism and ensuing violence over the last decade. However, this is not a singular event that has stemmed from uniquely specific factors. This is a product of the country’s long history of communal tensions and Hindutva outfits’ responsibility in stoking the fires in ensuring that said tensions evolve into deeper, more dangerous rifts whose brunt is borne by the Muslim civilians in the country. Tanika Sarkar, well-known intellectual and former professor at the Jawaharlal Nehru University – who has written largely on Indian politics, society and religion, told DW, a global news TV program broadcast by German public state-owned international broadcaster Deutsche Welle (DW). “What happens is that war does not immediately translate into violence at home but it translates into very bitter memories and histories and allegations. I don’t know how it is on the Pakistani side, I suppose very much the same thing … In the latest conflict in particular, India’s news channels did not help. Between May 8 and May 10, some of the most viewed channels reported sensational, unverified information which later turned out to be false. That, coupled with messages circulated on WhatsApp, created an environment of fear. This is a situation where you can’t believe or disbelieve anything. And in that situation if you are so minded, then you will start looking at every Muslim with suspicion … Even if these attacks aren’t the norm, they create a psyche of fear in the hearts of every Muslim who lives in India.” CJP has, in a sustained campaign, complained against such media outlets and is pursuing some of these cases with the NBDSA even now.

What Sarkar mentions needs to be highlighted, because Indian news media has attained a near vitriolic status when it comes to war-mongering and proselytizing Islamophobia. TV anchors called for “Israel-like final solutions” and repeatedly attempted to mobilize public opinion against a possible ceasefire. The attitude of the unprofessional conduct of entrenched electronic media channels was a subject matter of comment on international media. Political commentators trying to provide more nuanced takes on the situation at hand were silenced or side-lined. Nupur J. Sharma, editor of OpIndia, tweeted, ““Nobody cares. keep your candles. Keep your apples. Keep your shawls. Keep your Kashmiriyat. Stop the bloody drama,” in response to a candle march held by Kashmiris in condemnation of the attack.

Columnist and political researcher Asim Ali wrote for The Telegraph, “The function of the communally-coded messaging broadcast on news channels is not to ‘reflect’ the anger of the audience, as they claim. It is to create and sustain an angry, communal subject that identifies with the incendiary scripts and is conditioned to demand revenge on a shady ‘Muslim’ enemy as well as its political supporters. It is to reinforce the authority of the political executive even though it has failed to fulfil the substantive demands of the citizenry, now transformed into a passive Hindu audience with its exogenously- seeded communal demands.

Historical Context

Ali writes, “The foundational moment of the present regime can, arguably, be located in the 2002 Gujarat riots where this political experiment of constructing and exorcising a Muslim enemy had been carried out to fruition. That experiment culminated in the re-election of the Modi-led state government over thousands of dead bodies. We have already seen several reports of attacks on Kashmiri students by right-wing vigilantes from different states in the last few days.” Ali connecting Pahalgam to the Gujarat riots is very well-founded, because this chamber of violence is not neo-natal in its construction. It has been tried, tested and perfected over decades of institutionalizing codes of conduct of perpetuating harm towards the Islamic “other”.

To contextualize this further, one could look at the media coverage of the 2002 riots and the differences in its approach. In the Concerned Citizens Tribunal Report, Crimes Against Humanity released in November 2002, the Tribunal noted, “On February 28, the two largest circulation, multiple-edition Gujarati newspapers, Sandesh and  Gujarat Samachar, which are fairly dependent on the state government’s largesse, played up the unsubstantiated official version of there being a ‘foreign hand’ behind the Godhra tragedy. It was only 3-4 weeks later that reports rubbishing this theory began to appear in newspapers. But by that time, the damage had already been done. Sandesh and Gujarat Samachar have been playing a blatantly communal role since the BJP returned to power in Gujarat in 1998. The BJP government’s patronage of these dailies needs to be looked into carefully, so that they do not continue to act as mere government agents. In the recent carnage, too, the role of Sandesh was particularly mischievous, while some smaller circulation newspapers like Gujarat Today, Sadhbhav and Gujarat Mitra acted responsibly.”

A study done by Saifuddin Ahmed titled The Role of the Media during Communal Riots in India points out that national television media coverage of the riots had been “bold and independent” with journalists like Rajdeep Sardesai and Barkha Dutt at Star News repeatedly condemning the victimisation of the Muslims in Gujarat during the riots. Print publications like The Times of India and The Indian Express carried headlines that highlighted the atrocities faced by the Muslim communities. This of course resulted in them receiving a lot of flak from the BJP administration in Gujarat and the centre. According to Ahmed, “The Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, addressed the nation a day after the attacks, regretting the “disgraceful” violence. He later on added that the news media were presenting an “exaggerated” account of the situation in Gujarat. The BJP and the state government under Narendra Modi singled out STAR News and banned cable operators from showing the channel in the state. The viewers in Ahmedabad, one of the worst affected regions in the riots, were left with blank television screens, unaware of the reality happening on the streets. Cable operators received calls from local officials in Ahmedabad and other cities to completely blackout STAR News, Zee News, CNN and Aaj Tak. Dossiers and “hitlists” on journalists were reportedly prepared while the channels which dared to reveal the truth and were critical of the Chief Minister and his plan of actions were not invited to the press conferences and hence were denied the basic right to information by the state itself.”

One sees this model amplified in its worst possible form with – whose control is currently concentrated in the hands of corporate conglomerates with firm affiliations to the Indian state apparatus. This facilitation of the development of a monolithic opinion that centralizes hate is strengthened by the hostile crackdown on independent media outlets covering communal hatred and opposing the regime’s machinery. Over the course of the last month, the websites of multiple independent news media platforms such as that of The Wire, Maktoob Media, have been blocked by the government. One could also think of the temporarily blocking of the X account of Anuradha Bhasin, editor of Kashmir Times. In the last few years, the Indian government has zeroed down on completely dismantling press freedom by revoking non-profit status from independent news media outlets, routinely charging journalists with sedition and terrorism – and even monitoring them with the Israeli spyware, Pegasus. One must also remember, that several of the most powerful accused of the Gujarat riots have been released, and now roam free, having escaped through loopholes and intentional pardoning.

This however does not absolve less powerful or non-media actors of their role in furthering the bile of “revenge”. Al Jazeera found almost 20 songs that built on Hindutva-aligning sentiments that were meant to be incendiary. While H-Pop (Hindutva Pop) with a high degree of hate content has been a visible phenomenon over the past decade, Caravan and CJP have analysed these, Pahalgam gave this new hate music market a new focus and twist. All of these songs infiltrated into the timelines of Indian social media users, with outright calls for Hindus to identify the “traitors within the country”. At the same time, politicians and members of the Hindu right continued with the single focus agenda which is to lace every issue, every speech with its own peculiar dose of targeted hate.

According to our data, there were over 100 instances of hate speeches in the country. Here is an example, on May 5, in Bankura, West Bengal BJP MP Saumitra Khan, while submitting a memorandum demanding the deportation of alleged Pakistani nationals residing in the state, “urged Hindus to sell their land and houses only to fellow Hindus. He alleged that once their children move away and they pass away, Rohingyas would eventually occupy their homes”. In another instance, on May 4, BJP MLA Ravinder Singh Negi, “speaking at a religious event in a temple, claimed that Muslims train their children to become extremists in madrasas instead of providing them with proper education. He questioned why Hindus could not raise their children as extremists in temples. He also invoked the Pahalgam attack and dog-whistled for a boycott of those he described as ‘traitors’ within the country.”

One often sees politicians attributing the rise in communalism to the populace, rather than the multiple perpetrators of the same. Here, we could think of the concept of Astroturfing — which “is the deceptive practice of hiding the sponsors of an orchestrated message or organization (e.g., political, economic, advertising, religious, or public relations) to make it appear as though it originates from, and is supported by, unsolicited grassroots participants.” This could simply be translated to this: it is a process where a top-down method of dissemination is falsely recognised or propagated as a bottom-up one. If we were to integrate this conceptual framework with what Nalin Mehta writes in Modi and the Camera: The Politics of Television in the 2002 Gujarat Riots — “For our purpose, John B. Thompson’s notion of ‘mediated communication’, where he taps into the hermeneutic tradition to postulate that individuals are not passive recipients of symbolic messages from the communication media, is also pertinent. Messages from the mass media are received in settings spatially and temporally remote from the original context of production and the recipient’s own assumptions and expectations regulate how they are interpreted and appropriated,” – we would understand why things are the way they happen to be.

Responses

The institutional / state response to most of these hate crimes have not been very appropriate, with an observable systemic apathy in the nature of action taken by the administration / police forces. Most Chief Ministers of the states in question have not addressed the rising  tensions within their respective states, instead focusing on urging for befitting replies and prices that need to be paid. The police have been no better, in most cases being entirely absent from the scenes of violence, in others being complicit in institutional violence.

Graph representing the response of police in respective cases of hate crimes

Out of 180 data entries that were made situations where it was
Unclear if there was a case filed: 135 cases
Institutional Violence: 7 cases
Appropriate / Immediate police action: 15 cases
Definitively no case filed: 6
Police took action that harmed the Muslim victim: 17 cases

Out of the 39 cases that had clear police involvement, 53% or 24 of those cases were ones where the police were complicit outright. The other thing to be mentioned here is in all the cases where we are dealing with unclear police involvement, we are unsure whether no case has been filed or whether attempts were made and then rejected.

The worst affected, however, have been Kashmiris and Kashmiri Muslims, in particular. Following the Pahalgam attack, surveillance has intensified in Kashmir. According to Kashmir Times, “In the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror attack, security forces have launched extensive operations across Kashmir, demolishing about a dozen houses using explosives and conducting widespread searches and detentions. At least 1500 people are said to have been detained. The demolitions have occurred in multiple districts including Pulwama, Shopian, Anantnag, Kupwara, and Bandipora”.  There have been multiple incidents of Kashmiri students being harassed in other states, creating an almost paranoid sense of hypervigilance among these individuals. Kashmiri businessmen have also found themselves in trouble, where selling their wares has become near-impossible within the current climate.

Mirza Waheed, writer born in Srinagar, Kashmir, wrote for The Guardian, “Kashmiris have never wanted to be a bone of contention between the two states; they have paid a staggeringly steep price for this 75-year relationship of attrition. Internally, Kashmir has never really been normal, despite the narrative push and despite the appearance of normality, scripted elsewhere and executed on the ground through a security-administrative complex. Underneath the quiet, there is growing resentment at what Kashmiris see as their incremental and cumulative dispossession and disempowerment, in the form of new domicile and land laws, and in the absence of any real representational politics. Human rights activists, journalists and politicians remain in jail under harsh anti-terror laws. Nobody is allowed to speak; surveillance is probably at its highest since the start of the armed insurgency in the late 1980s; a previously independent and robust press has almost entirely been forced into a supine, compliant role. Most accounts from Kashmir speak of suppressed anger at the growing powerlessness and the humiliating deprivation of agency. Many Kashmiris talk about dham, a quiet, bruising suffocation, with no space to breathe. That all this is fertile ground for militancy is hardly a surprise, whether local or Pakistan-sponsored.”

All seems to remain unwell, in the land of what has turned out to be the homeland of misdiagnosed glory and gore.

(The legal research team of CJP consists of lawyers and interns; this graphic visualisation report has been worked on by Saptaparma Samajdar)

Sources

1. https://m.thewire.in/article/media/communalisation-pahalgam-reinforcing-anti-muslim-sentiment
2. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/4/29/traitors-hate-filled-songs-target-indian-muslims-after-kashmir-attack
3. https://muslimmirror.com/right-wing-media-channels-peddle-anti-muslim-narratives-after-pahalgam-attack/
4. https://www.deccanherald.com/india/uttarakhand/uttarakhand-cm-condemns-terror-attack-in-jks-pahalgam-3505295
5. https://www.reuters.com/article/world/kashmir-domicile-law-raises-fears-of-losing-land-culture-idUSKCN24T007/
6. https://www.amnesty.org.uk/blogs/country-specialists/five-years-silence-and-struggle-kashmir
7. https://article-14.com/post/-what-did-i-do-after-pahalgam-attack-kashmiri-students-in-at-least-4-northern-states-face-intimidation-threats-isolation–680b16d1a8d53
8. https://www.thehindu.com/education/pahalgam-attack-casts-a-shadow-over-jammu-and-kashmir-students-outside-state/article69531760.ece
9. https://www.dw.com/en/india-pakistan-conflict-risks-deepening-religious-tensions/a-72529635
10. https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1080/00856400601031989
11. https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/05/03/india-media-freedom-under-threat#:~:text=Amid%20growing%20restrictions%20on%20media,spyware%20Pegasus%20to%20target%20journalists.
12. https://cjp.org.in/role-of-the-media-how-hate-was-spread-in-2002-in-gujarat/

The post CJP breaks down post-Pahalgam hate attacks through graphics and data appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Immigrant Expulsion from Assam Act, 1950 (hereinafter IEAA) emerged from the unique and tumultuous socio-political landscape of post-Partition India. Enacted to address the significant influx of migrants into Assam, primarily from what was then East Bengal (later East Pakistan, and now Bangladesh), the IEAA was a legislative response to demographic shifts perceived as impacting the region’s economy and social fabric. At the time of its enactment, the general framework of the Foreigners Act, 1946, did not extend to individuals migrating from the newly formed Dominion of Pakistan, necessitating a specific statute for Assam which was experiencing a particularly acute situation.

Recently, the IEAA has been thrust into the spotlight due to interpretations suggesting it confers, or that the Supreme Court of India has affirmed its conferral of, extensive and summary expulsion powers upon district administrative authorities, such as District Collectors or Deputy Commissioners. This interpretation, notably articulated by Assam’s Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma, posits that these authorities can expel individuals deemed to be foreigners under the IEAA without recourse to the established quasi-judicial process of the Foreigners Tribunals. Such an interpretation implies a significant departure from the procedural safeguards that have evolved in Indian administrative and constitutional law concerning the determination of nationality and the profound act of deportation.

This article contends that such an interpretation is a fundamental misreading of the IEAA itself, is not substantiated by a careful analysis of the Supreme Court’s recent judgment in In Re: Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955 and stands in opposition to established principles of administrative law and due process.[1] This piece builds on an earlier work discussing the processes and procedures of deportation, which can be accessed here.

Far from endorsing an unfettered executive power of expulsion at the district level, the Supreme Court’s pronouncements, when read holistically, suggest an integration of the IEAA within the existing, more elaborate procedural framework for identifying and dealing with foreigners. The erratic understanding appears to arise from a selective and decontextualized reading of both the 1950 Act and the Supreme Court’s observations, potentially fuelled by a desire for more expedited executive action in a complex and sensitive domain. The timing of this re-interpretation, particularly following the Supreme Court’s judgment, suggests an attempt to leverage judicial pronouncements to legitimise a pre-existing executive inclination towards summary powers, overlooking the nuanced directives for the harmonized application of various statutes governing foreigners in Assam.

II. The Immigrant Expulsion from Assam Act, 1950: Legislative intent and provisions

An examination of the IEAA’s text is essential to understand its original scope and intended operation. The pivotal provision concerning expulsion is Section 2, titled “Power to order expulsion of certain immigrants”. This section states as follows:

2. Power to order expulsion of certain immigrants.—If the Central Government is of opinion that any person or class of persons, having been ordinarily resident in any place outside India, has or have, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, come into Assam and that the stay of such person or class of persons in Assam is detrimental to the interests of the general public of India or of any section thereof or of any Scheduled Tribe in Assam, the Central Government may by order—

(a) direct such person or class of persons to remove himself or themselves from India or Assam within such time and by such route as may be specified in the order; and

 (b) give such further directions in regard to his or their removal from India or Assam as it may consider necessary or expedient:

Provided that nothing in this section shall apply to any person who on account of civil disturbances or the fear of such disturbances in any area now forming part of Pakistan has been displaced from or has left his place of residence in such area and who has been subsequently residing in Assam.

The basis for such an order is the Central Government’s “opinion” that the continued presence of the individual or group is “detrimental” to specified public interests. While the formation of an opinion involves subjective satisfaction, in the contemporary administrative law paradigm, such satisfaction cannot be arbitrary or devoid of objective material; it remains susceptible to judicial review on grounds of mala fides, non-application of mind, or reliance on irrelevant considerations, particularly when fundamental rights—Article 14 and 21 in this case— are implicated. More on this is discussed in Part VI of this article. For now, let us get back to IEAA.

The Act further provides for the delegation of these powers. Section 3 of the IEAA, “Delegation of power,” states:

“The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, direct that the powers and duties conferred or imposed on it by section 2 shall, subject to such conditions, if any, as may be specified in the notification, be exercised or discharged also by—

(a) any officer subordinate to the Central Government.

(b) the Government of Assam, Meghalaya or Nagaland or any officer subordinate to that Government.”

This provision underscores that any power exercised by a District Collector or Deputy Commissioner under the IEAA would stem from a specific, conditional delegation by the Central Government. It is not an autonomous power. The nature and scope of such delegated authority are circumscribed by the conditions laid down in the notification and the parent Act itself. The claim that District Collectors inherently possess sweeping expulsion powers under the IEAA overlooks this crucial two-step process: the primary power resting with the Central Government, followed by a conditional delegation.

Furthermore, the Proviso to Section 2 of the IEAA introduces a significant qualification:

“Provided that nothing in this section shall apply to any person who on account of civil disturbances or the fear of such disturbances in any area now forming part of Pakistan has been displaced from or has left his place of residence in such area and who has been subsequently residing in Assam.”

This proviso indicates that even in 1950, the legislature intended to differentiate among categories of migrants, offering protection to those displaced due to civil disturbances. This nuanced approach undermines any interpretation of the IEAA as an indiscriminate tool for the summary expulsion of all individuals who might have entered Assam from territories that became Pakistan. It suggests a legislative intent sensitive to humanitarian concerns, even within an Act focused on expulsion.

The original legislative intent, as contextualized by the Supreme Court, was to address a specific gap: the Foreigners Act, 1946, did not initially apply to immigrants from Pakistan (as it was then) specifically, and Assam was facing a unique migratory pressure. The IEAA was thus a targeted measure for a particular historical moment, preceding the more comprehensive and procedurally detailed framework later established by the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964.

III. Decoding the Supreme Court’s Judgment in In Re: Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955

The Supreme Court’s judgment in In Re: Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955 is central to the current debate. A careful reading of the opinions of the learned judges is necessary to ascertain what the Court actually said about the IEAA and its interplay with other laws.

Chief Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud’s Opinion

CJI Justice Chandrachud(as he was then), in his opinion, provided a historical overview of the IEAA, noting its enactment was prompted by the fact that the Foreigners Act, 1946, initially did not cover immigrants from Pakistan, and that the IEAA was specifically applied to Assam to deal with large-scale immigration from East Bengal. The Foreigners Act’s limitation was due to the fact that it was enacted during the British rule and the limitation was rectified via an amendment in 1957.

This historical context is vital, as it positions the IEAA as a measure designed to fill a legislative void that was subsequently addressed by more comprehensive legal frameworks.

Justice Chandrachud’s opinion, while not having any declarations over whether the IEAA survives or not, had two crucial points.

1. Parliament did not want the powers given by IEAA to be used against those who were refugees that have migrated into India in account of civil disturbances or the fear of it (Para 53).
2. The act only applied to the state of Assam meaning—not only that these powers can only be granted to the district authorities in Assam, but the exercise of these powers can also only be against the immigrants in Assam and not rest of India (Para 53). This means that forcibly transporting alleged immigrants to Assam and using IEAA to deport them is not lawful.

Justice Surya Kant’s opinion for the majority

Justice Surya Kant’s opinion, on behalf of himself and Justices M.M. Sundresh and Manoj Misra, contains several crucial points regarding the IEAA.

1. Critically, Justice Kant stated that the IEAA and the Foreigners Act, 1946, are not in conflict and, in fact, “supplement and complement each other within the framework of Section 6A” (Para 376). This statement directly counters any notion that the IEAA operates in isolation with overriding powers, suggesting instead a synergistic relationship.
2. Referencing Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India, Justice Surya Kant affirmed that the IEAA, the Foreigners Act, 1946, the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964, and the Passport Act, 1967, all apply to the State of Assam.[2] This reinforces the understanding of a composite legal framework governing foreigners in Assam, rather than the IEAA standing as a singular, overriding statute.
3. One of the key directives issued by the Bench for which Justice Surya Kant authored the opinion is: “The provisions of the Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 shall also be read into Section 6A and shall be effectively employed for the purpose of identification of illegal immigrants. (Para 391)“ The phrasing “read into Section 6A” and “employed for the purpose of identification” strongly suggests an integrative and procedural application. Section 6A (1)(b) of the Citizenship Act, 1955 itself defines “detected to be a foreigner” by reference to the Foreigners Act, 1946 and the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964. If the IEAA were intended to provide an alternative, tribunal-exempt route for expulsion, the judgment would likely have clarified this. Instead, its use is linked to “identification,” which is a primary function leading to or forming part of the tribunal process.
4. Justice Surya Kant further opined as follows about the scope of both IEAA and the Foreigners Act, 1946:

As discussed above, IEAA is only one of the statutes that addressed a specific problem that existed in 1950. The issue of undesirable immigration in 1950 necessitated the promulgation of the IEAA and the granting of power to the Central government to expel such immigrants. On the contrary, the provisions of Section 6A have to be viewed from the focal point of 1971, when Bangladesh was formed as a new nation and an understanding was reached to grant citizenship to certain classes of immigrants who had migrated from erstwhile East Pakistan, as has been detailed in paragraphs 230 and 231 of this judgement. Hence, Section 6A, when examined from this perspective, is seen to have a different objective—one of granting citizenship to certain classes of immigrants, particularly deemed citizenship to those immigrants who came to India before 01.01.1966 and qualified citizenship, to those who came on or after 01.01.1966 and before 25.03.1971.

Since the two statutes operate in different spheres, we find no conflict existing between them. The Parliament was fully conversant with the dynamics and realities, while enacting both the Statutes. The field of operation of the two enactments being distinct and different and there being a presumption of the Legislature having informed knowledge about their consequences, we decline to hold that Section 6A is in conflict with a differently situated statute, namely the IEAA.

Instead, we are satisfied that IEAA and Section 6A can be read harmoniously along with other statutes. As held in Sarbananda Sonawal (supra), none of these Statutes exist as a standalone code but rather supplement each other. [Paras 379, 380 & 381]

Justice J.B. Pardiwala’s Opinion

Justice Pardiwala, in his dissent over the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955, touches upon IEAA but not in any substantial terms.

Collectively, these opinions affirm the continued validity and operability of the IEAA but situate its application within the broader, evolved legal framework governing foreigners. There is no explicit statement in any of the opinions that the IEAA empowers District Collectors to expel individuals based on a prima facie “opinion” without reference to the Foreigners Tribunals, nor that such an “opinion” under IEAA can substitute a tribunal’s quasi-judicial finding. Such a significant departure from the established Tribunal system, if endorsed by the Supreme Court, would have necessitated clear and unambiguous language, which is conspicuously absent.

IV. Why the Supreme Court Judgment disallows an inference of unfettered expulsion powers under IEAA, 1950

The assertion that the Supreme Court’s judgment in In Re: Section 6A  grants, or affirms, sweeping summary expulsion powers to District Collectors under the IEAA, thereby bypassing the Foreigners Tribunals, is not borne out by a careful reading of the judicial pronouncements. Several arguments counter this interpretation:

First, the judgment, particularly Justice Surya Kant’s opinion, emphasizes integration and supplementation, not supersession. The directive to “read into Section 6A” and employ the IEAA “for the purpose of identification of illegal immigrants” (Para 391(e)) implies that the IEAA is to function as a component within the broader machinery. Section 6A (1)(b) of the Citizenship Act itself defines “detected to be a foreigner” as detection “in accordance with the provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946 and the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964 by a Tribunal constituted under the said Order”. If the IEAA were to provide a parallel mechanism that bypasses this definition for expulsion purposes, the Supreme Court would have had to explicitly state that the requirement of tribunal-based detection could be circumvented under the IEAA. No such statement is made. Instead, the IEAA’s role is linked to “identification,” which is the preliminary step that often leads to a reference to a Foreigners Tribunal for a conclusive determination of status.

Second, the power delineated in Section 2 of the IEAA is primarily vested in the Central Government. While Section 3 allows for the delegation of this power, such delegation is subject to conditions specified in the notification. Crucially, delegated power cannot be exercised in a manner that contravenes fundamental due process requirements or ignores established statutory mechanisms like the Foreigners Tribunals, especially when the Supreme Court itself links the IEAA’s contemporary use to “identification” within the Section 6A framework. The scope of delegated authority cannot be broader than the power of the delegating authority when read in conjunction with other prevailing laws and constitutional mandates ensuring procedural fairness.

Third, the Supreme Court’s affirmation of the IEAA’s validity and continued operability signifies that the Act remains on the statute books and can be invoked. However, this affirmation does not translate into a license to use the Act in a manner that disregards the specialised, quasi-judicial mechanism of Foreigners Tribunals. These tribunals are specifically established for the determination of a person’s status as a foreigner – a critical determination that must precede the severe consequence of expulsion. The interpretation that “valid and operative” means “valid for summary, independent action” is a misconstruction; the Act is valid as part of the legal toolkit, not as a master key that overrides other procedural safeguards.

Fourth, the profound implications for due process and individual liberty that would arise from granting summary expulsion powers to District Collectors, bypassing tribunals, are such that if the Supreme Court intended to endorse such a system, it would have done so explicitly and with clear reasoning. The Court’s silence on this specific point, coupled with its emphasis on the integrated and complementary application of the relevant statutes, is telling. The judgment upholds the IEAA’s existence but implicitly requires its application to be harmonized with the current, more evolved procedural framework for determining foreigner status. The focus on “identification” by Justice Surya Kant (J. Surya Kant, Para 391(e)) is pivotal. Identification is typically the precursor to adjudication by a Tribunal. If the IEAA allowed a District Collector to identify and expel based solely on a “prima facie” view, as suggested by Assam CM, the elaborate and long-standing Foreigners Tribunal system in Assam would be rendered largely redundant for a significant category of cases – an outcome the Supreme Court does not appear to endorse.

V. Harmonising the IEAA 1950 with the Foreigners Act, 1946, and the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964

The Foreigners Act, 1946, particularly Section 3, empowers the Central Government to make orders, inter alia, for prohibiting, regulating, or restricting the entry of foreigners into India or their presence therein. It is under this provision that the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964, was promulgated, establishing Foreigners Tribunals specifically for the quasi-judicial determination of whether a person is a foreigner. This mechanism is central to the definition of “detected to be a foreigner” in Section 6A (1)(b) of the Citizenship Act and is frequently referenced in the Supreme Court’s judgment as the established process.

A harmonious construction, consistent with the Supreme Court’s directive to “read into Section 6A” and use the IEAA “for identification” [J. Surya Kant, Para 391(e)], would mean that information gathered or preliminary assessments made by the district administration (as a delegate of the Central Government under IEAA Section 3) could form the basis of a reference to a Foreigners Tribunal. The “opinion” of the Central Government (or its delegate) under IEAA Section 2 that a person’s stay is “detrimental,” could serve as a ground for initiating a formal inquiry or making such a reference. However, the crucial determination of foreigner status itself, which is a prerequisite for expulsion under either Act, would remain within the purview of the Foreigners Tribunals, as per the dominant legislative scheme and procedural due process.

This interpretation aligns with Justice Surya Kant’s observation that the IEAA and the Foreigners Act “supplement and complement each other”, rather than the IEAA providing an overriding, summary power that displaces the tribunal system. The Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964, provides a specific and more recent procedural mechanism for the determination of foreigner status.

The IEAA, on the other hand, is broader in identifying the class of persons who can be expelled and the ultimate executive authority responsible (the Central Government or its delegate). Harmonisation suggests that the IEAA identifies who might be subject to expulsion and by whom the ultimate executive order of expulsion might be issued, while the Foreigners Act and the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order provide the process for establishing the critical precedent fact – whether the individual is indeed a foreigner. The term “identification” used by Justice Surya Kant is distinct from “adjudication” or “declaration” of foreigner status. District administration can play a role in preliminary identification (i.e., forming a prima facie suspicion), but the quasi-judicial adjudication of that status, given its severe consequences, aligns with the specialized role of Foreigners Tribunals.

VI. Jurisprudential foundations: Due Process and limitations on executive power in expulsion

The exercise of any statutory power, particularly one as impactful as expulsion, must be viewed through the prism of India’s evolved constitutional jurisprudence. Administrative law principles, especially those concerning natural justice (audi alteram partem, rule against bias) and the requirement for reasoned decisions, have been significantly strengthened by the Supreme Court over decades. An archaic statute like the IEAA, 1950, cannot be interpreted in a vacuum, isolated from these constitutional developments. The principle of “updating construction” requires that older statutes be read, as far as possible, in conformity with later constitutional norms and human rights jurisprudence. The IEAA, therefore, must operate within the current legal environment where procedural fairness is paramount.

For example, in Hukam Chand Lal vs. Union of India, the government disconnected the person’s telephones, citing a “public emergency” due to their alleged use for illegal forward trading (satta). The Supreme Court found the disconnection unlawful.[3] It held that the authority, the Divisional Engineer, failed to apply his own mind and record his own satisfaction that an emergency existed. Instead, he acted solely on the government’s declaration. The Court ruled that such drastic powers require the designated authority to rationally form their own opinion, not just follow orders.

In S.N. Mukherjee vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court addressed whether administrative authorities must provide reasons for their decisions.[4] In this case, the Court laid down a landmark principle: the requirement to record reasons is a part of natural justice. It held that providing reasons ensures fairness, prevents arbitrariness, guarantees application of mind by the authority, and enables effective judicial review.

The determination of whether a person is a foreigner, a decision that can lead to expulsion, has profound consequences for individual liberty, family life, and personal security. Such a determination inherently demands a fair, transparent, and quasi-judicial process. To contend that the IEAA allows for summary expulsion based solely on an executive “opinion,” without a quasi-judicial hearing by a specialized body like a Foreigners Tribunal, would be to argue for a procedure that is likely to be deemed arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 guarantees that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law, and such procedure must be fair, just, and reasonable.

The very establishment and continued strengthening of the Foreigners Tribunal system over several decades signifies a legislative and judicial recognition that determining foreigner status is a complex matter requiring a specialized, quasi-judicial approach. While there are issues with the current system of foreigner tribunals, the way is not to go backward in terms of procedural fairness but to move forward to make processes fairer. This evolution points away from purely executive determinations of such critical facts, especially when a statutory framework for quasi-judicial assessment is in place.

VII. Conclusion: Upholding the rule of law and procedural propriety

The analysis of the Immigrant Expulsion from Assam Act, 1950, the relevant provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946, the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964, and the Supreme Court’s judgment in In Re: Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955  leads to the firm conclusion that the IEAA does not confer unfettered, summary expulsion powers upon district administrative authorities that would allow them to bypass the established quasi-judicial framework of the Foreigners Tribunals.

The Supreme Court’s judgment, far from endorsing such an interpretation, supports an integrated and harmonized application of these statutes. Justice Surya Kant’s directive to “read into Section 6A” and employ the IEAA “for the purpose of identification of illegal immigrants” [ J. Surya Kant, Para 391(e)] indicates that the IEAA is to be used as a tool within the broader framework, likely to initiate inquiries or make references to the Foreigners Tribunals, which remain the designated bodies for the quasi-judicial determination of a person’s status as a foreigner. This interpretation is consistent with the principle that specific procedural statutes (like the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order) govern the determination process, while the IEAA may provide grounds or identify the authority for expulsion once such determination is made.

The constitutional imperatives of due process, enshrined in Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, mandate that any action as severe as determining nationality and ordering expulsion must be preceded by a fair and just procedure. In the context of Assam, this procedure is embodied in the Foreigners Tribunal system. Any interpretation that suggests the IEAA allows District Collectors to unilaterally form an “opinion” and expel individuals without recourse to these tribunals is not only a misreading of the Supreme Court’s recent judgment but also runs contrary to the evolution of administrative and constitutional law in India. Such an approach would be detrimental to the rule of law and could lead to arbitrary outcomes, eroding public trust in the legal system’s ability to handle complex immigration issues with fairness and consistency.

The constitutionally appropriate approach is for the district administration—acting under powers delegated by the Central Government, including those under the IEAA—to identify suspected illegal immigrants and refer their cases to the Foreigners Tribunals for a quasi-judicial determination of status. Deportation may then proceed in accordance with established legal procedures, which you can read about here. This ensures a balance between the state’s legitimate interest in managing immigration and its constitutional obligation to uphold the rule of law and procedural fairness.

(The author is part of the legal research team of the organisation)

[1] 2024 INSC 789

[2] (2005) 5 SCC 665

[3] AIR 1976 SUPREME COURT 789

[4] 1990 (4) SCC 564

Related:

Gauhati HC questions legal basis of re-detention of bail-compliant detainee, orders verification of police attendance record

Seeking sanctuary, facing scrutiny: Why India must revisit its approach to the displaced

Gauhati HC: Union government admits Samsul Ali was handed over to BSF, Court grants family visitation rights if not yet deported

Holding centres, missing memos, and silent transfers: Gauhati HC hears 5 petitions filed by families of Bengali-speaking Muslim detainees in Assam

India: A deep dive into the legal obligations before “deportation”

CJP submits supplementary memo to NHRC with survivor and family testimonies on Assam’s expulsions of Bengali-speaking Muslims

The post The contested interpretation of the Immigrant Expulsion from Assam Act, 1950 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

This move by the temple authorities came directly on the heels of intense pressure and vocal demands from pro-right-wing organisations and even a local NCP MLA, all demanding for the removal of non-Hindu workers from the temple’s operations. A protest rally led by Ahmednagar (Ahilyanagar) NCP MLA Sangram Jagtap was also organised on June 14, 2025.

शनीशिंगणापूरमध्ये हिंदू समाजाच्या श्रद्धेचा घोर अपमान झाला.
११८ जिहादी मानसिकतेच्या लोकांना शुद्ध मंदिरात नोकऱ्या देण्याचा निर्णय हा हिंदू धर्म, परंपरा व श्रद्धेवर थेट घाला होता.
मी या निर्णयाविरोधात शनी भूमीत ठाम भूमिका घेतली. pic.twitter.com/et07OLYUUs

— MLA Sangram Jagtap (@sangrambhaiya) June 15, 2025

Following pressure from right-wing outfits, the Shani Shingnapur Temple Trust held internal meetings on June 8 and 14. Soon after these closed-door deliberations, the Trust issued dismissal orders for 167 workers, marking a significant and controversial move, as per a report in Maktoob Media.

While the temple management has vehemently denied any allegations of religious discrimination or bias, asserting that the decision was based purely on absenteeism and subpar work performance, the timing of these dismissals has raised significant concerns.

Occurring just days after the public outcries from Hindutva groups, the sequence of events has led many observers to question the true underlying motives behind the Trust’s actions. The stark contrast between the village’s open-door philosophy and the sudden closure of opportunities for Muslim workers at the temple presents a complex and troubling narrative.

Viral video showing Muslim workers doing work near the temple ignites controversy and demands for exclusion

The seeds of this controversy were sown in May, when a video clip rapidly gained traction across social media platforms. This footage depicted Muslim individuals engaged in painting and maintenance activities in the vicinity of the revered Shani Shingnapur temple. Almost immediately, the video became a flashpoint, drawing sharp criticism and objections from an array of right-wing organisations and leaders.

Their core demand was unequivocal–non-Hindus, they insisted, should be barred from working within the ‘sacred precincts of the shrine’. This chorus of demands quickly intensified, building considerable pressure on the temple administration.

११८ जिहाद्यांना शनी मंदिरात ठेवण्याचा प्रकार हिंदू धर्माचा अपमान आहे!
शुद्ध हिंदू मंदिरात अशुद्ध विचारांचा शिरकाव सहन केला जाणार नाही.
१४ जून २०२५, शनिवार | संध्याकाळी ४ वाजता
शनी शिंगणापूरमध्ये भव्य मोर्चा!

हजारो हिंदू बांधव उपस्थित राहणार आहेत – तुम्हीही या! pic.twitter.com/NUnVERBfhb

— MLA Sangram Jagtap (@sangrambhaiya) June 13, 2025

Notably, these terminations occurred without any prior public hearing or a formal, impartial investigation into the allegations or the workers’ performance. This abrupt action, coming on the heels of the viral video and the escalating demands, further fuelled the contentious narrative surrounding the temple’s employment practices.

Right-wing outfits earlier demanded the removal of the Muslim workers

The pro-right-wing organisations, including the Hindu Janajagruti Samiti (HJS) and Sakal Hindu Samaj (SHS), led the campaign demanding the removal of Muslim workers from the Shani Shingnapur temple. These groups vehemently demanded the immediate removal of Muslim workers, expressing concerns about the sanctity of the temple and what they perceived as a disregard for Hindu sentiments.

Just a day before the dismissals, the HJS publicly called for immediate action. Through their official social media handle on X (formerly Twitter), the HJS stated, “Shocking! 114 Muslim workers deployed inside the sacred Shani Shingnapur temple; grill installed on holy platform, hurting Hindu sentiments. Demand for their immediate removal & strict action on officials who allowed this — @SG_HJS, Hindu Janajagruti Samiti. Govt urged to adopt Tirupati-like Hindu-only staff policy!”

Shocking ! 114 Muslim workers deployed inside the sacred Shani Shingnapur temple; grill installed on holy platform, hurting Hindu sentiments.

Demand for their immediate removal & strict action on officials who allowed this — @SG_HJS, Hindu Janajagruti Samiti.

Govt urged… pic.twitter.com/ig7FboLYRC

— HinduJagrutiOrg (@HinduJagrutiOrg) June 13, 2025

Similarly, the Sakal Hindu Samaj, an allied pro-right-wing outfit of the HJS, also voiced its concerns days before the removal decision. The outfit, through a social media post on X, directly appealed to the Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis for immediate intervention, questioning the very sanctity of the temple with the presence of Muslim workers. Their post on X read:

“Shani Mandir Trust at Shani Shingnapur in #Ahilyanagar has given jobs to 118 Muslims. These heretics do not believe in #Hindu gods, how will they maintain the sanctity of this temple? Are we waiting for another #Tirupati laddu fiasco to happen or readying ourselves for opening of Mecca and Medina for non Muslims ? Especially since this temple comes under the control of the #Maharashtra government Request to @Dev_Fadnavis to take immediate action on this and maintain the sanctity of the temple.”

Shani Mandir Trust at Shani Shingnapur in #Ahilyanagar has given jobs to 118 Muslims.

These heretics do not believe in #Hindu gods, how will they maintain the sanctity of this temple?
Are we waiting for another #Tirupati laddu fiasco to happen or readying ourselves for opening… pic.twitter.com/BI8693rD6K

— Sakal Hindu Samaj (@sakal_hindu_) June 8, 2025

Right-wing outfits hail dismissals, call for similar review and action at other temples

Following the temple trust’s decision, right-wing outfits Sakal Hindu Samaj and Acharya Tushar Bhosale, chief of the BJP Spiritual Coordination Front, celebrated the move. Bhosale explicitly stated the dismissals were a direct result of pressure from a “grand march” organised by “the entire Hindu society” in protest of Muslim employees. He hailed it as a “victory of the unity of the entire Hindu society,” indicating a clear intent to influence temple employment practices based on religious identity.

Bhosale said that, “In protest of the appointment of Muslim employees at the Shani Shingnapur temple, all of us, under the leadership of the entire Hindu society, organized a grand march yesterday. But under the pressure of this march, the temple administration has announced that they are removing the Muslim employees from their jobs. I congratulate all the Shani devotees of the country and the entire Hindu society, because this is a victory of the unity of the entire Hindu society”

Nashik, Maharashtra: Out of the 167 employees removed from the Shani Shingnapur temple, 114 were from the Muslim community

BJP Spiritual Coordination Front chief Acharya Tushar Bhosale says, “In protest of the appointment of Muslim employees at the Shani Shingnapur temple, all… pic.twitter.com/yvAutINbp7

— IANS (@ians_india) June 13, 2025

Similarly, the Sakal Hindu Samaj commended the temple’s action. They framed the dismissals as a response to “anger in the Hindu community” over Muslim employees allegedly installing grills on a sacred platform.

#Shani_Shingnapur Temple removes 114 Muslim employees following public outrage over breach of sanctity.
Hindu Janajagruti Samiti welcomes the decision & urges similar reviews in other temples to ensure staff uphold #Hindu traditions. pic.twitter.com/fOxOkfP7IP

— HinduJagrutiOrg (@HinduJagrutiOrg) June 14, 2025

Beyond endorsing the Shingnapur decision, the Sakal Hindu Samaj, along with organisations like Hindu Janajagruti Samiti and Maharashtra Mandir Mahasangh, has now publicly demanded investigations into the appointments of “people of other religions” in other government-managed temples, urging their “immediate” removal.

शनि शिंगणापुर मंदिर से 114 मुस्लिम कर्मियों की छुट्टी, ‘बिंदास बोल’ की हुंकार और सकल हिंदू समाज के आंदोलन की जीत#shanishingnapur #Maharashtra #bindasbol #SanatanDharma @SureshChavhankehttps://t.co/C93edBHdDi pic.twitter.com/6xiQ965lI4

— Sudarshan News (@SudarshanNewsTV) June 14, 2025

Temple body denies religious bias, cites performance issues amid discrimination allegations

Amid mounting allegations of religious discrimination, temple officials at Shani Shingnapur have firmly denied that faith played any role in the mass dismissal of workers. They claim the decision was based purely on operational efficiency, pointing out that only around 900 of the 2,400 contracted workers were regularly reporting for duty, while the rest were allegedly underperforming or frequently absent.

However, the move has sparked controversy, as the majority of those dismissed were low-wage Muslim labourers engaged in essential but menial tasks—such as sweeping, tending to the cowshed, agricultural work, and performing routine administrative duties. Many of these workers were hired without formal employment contracts, leaving them vulnerable and without legal safeguards.

Critics argue that the lack of documented performance reviews and transparent processes raises serious questions about the fairness and intent behind the dismissals, especially in light of the preceding pressure from right-wing groups demanding the removal of Muslim staff.

114 Muslim employees dismissed from Shani Shingnapur temple, along with few others on grounds of indiscipline and irregularities. pic.twitter.com/zkCbqtKMeg

— Megh Updates (@MeghUpdates) June 13, 2025

Controversy not new to Shingnapur

Religious discrimination is not a first-time controversy for the Shingnapur. In September 2024, Shingnapur Gram Panchayat passed a controversial resolution barring the registration of new Muslim voters, specifically targeting “recently arrived” individuals. Justified under claims of preventing “illegal Bangladeshi immigrants,” the move demanded the removal of existing Muslim names from electoral rolls. Civil rights groups condemned it as unconstitutional and sought legal action against the panchayat. Following widespread backlash, Sarpanch Rasika Patil issued a public apology, stating the resolution was misrepresented and no such action would be taken.

The gram panchayat of #Shingnapur village in #Maharashtra‘s #Kolhapur district passed a resolution on 5 September barring the registration of new #Muslim voters in electoral rolls. The panchayat’s decision, which specifically targets #Muslims ‘recently arrived’ in the village,… pic.twitter.com/EA2oinwi2A

— Hate Detector (@HateDetectors) September 16, 2024

This incident followed an earlier resolution in August 2023, where the panchayat prohibited the allotment of village land for religious events—another decision widely criticised for targeting minority communities. Together, these actions suggest a troubling pattern of exclusion under the guise of administrative control.

Related:

The Right to Worship my God

Faith Knows No Religion: Banke Bihari Temple again rejects boycott call against Muslim artisans and businesses

Harmony vs disharmony in 2 states: Kerala temple welcomes Muslims; MP temple fires Muslims

The post Right-wing outfits and NCP MLA’s protest led to dismissal of 114 Muslim workers at Shani Shingnapur temple in Maharashtra appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Demolition drives

1. Ashok Vihar demolitions, Delhi: Bulldozers arrive at dawn

In a sweeping demolition drive, a special task force accompanied by a heavy police and paramilitary presence razed over 300 jhuggis (slum dwellings) in the Ashok Vihar area of North Delhi on a Monday morning. The operation, led by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) on June 16, targeted more than 200 structures in the densely populated Jailorwala Bagh slum cluster.

The demolition began early in the day, with authorities barricading access roads and deploying multiple bulldozers and personnel from various departments. According to the DDA, the operation exclusively targeted jhuggis whose occupants had already been allocated flats under the in-situ Jailorwala Bagh rehabilitation project or were deemed ineligible under the housing policy. Officials claimed that slums protected by court orders were left untouched.

The official line: The DDA defended the demolition as a lawful and necessary step, claiming that 1,078 families had already been resettled in newly constructed 1BHK flats on the same site. These apartments, developed at a cost of ₹421 crore and valued at ₹25 lakh each, were made available to the rehabilitated families for a highly subsidised rate of ₹1.4 lakh. Another 567 households were declared ineligible based on policy guidelines.

Eligibility, according to the Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board (DUSIB), depended on two criteria: inclusion in the 2012–2015 voter rolls and possession of at least one of twelve identity documents — such as a ration card, electricity bill, passport, or bank passbook. Disqualified families included those residing on upper floors without separate documentation, minors, and individuals who used their jhuggis for commercial purposes before January 1, 2015.

Authorities also pointed out that nine families successfully contested their rejection and were subsequently allotted homes via a lottery system. As per Times of India, DDA spokesperson asserted, “Due process was followed. We respected all High Court stay orders. The demolitions were confined to those already rehabilitated or found ineligible.”

Hundreds still without shelter: Despite these assurances, ground reports and testimonies from affected residents painted a more distressing picture. Multiple media reports, including The Indian Express, alleged they had been left out of the allotment process despite decades of residence and valid documentation. Rama Devi, a relative of one of the evicted residents, said, “Only about 1,000 families got flats. More than 500 families are still shelterless. We’ve been here for decades, working as street vendors and domestic workers. Now we are evicted without compensation or alternative housing.” Others voiced concerns about the conditions in the newly allotted apartments.

Simultaneous demolitions in Wazirpur: While Ashok Vihar was in the headlines, another anti-encroachment drive was underway in Wazirpur, where the Indian Railways removed hundreds of dwellings built along the tracks. Officials cited safety concerns, such as children playing dangerously close to railway lines and reduced visibility for train drivers. The operation marked the second major clearance in the area within a month.

Security was tight, with police and two companies of paramilitary personnel deployed to prevent any unrest. Officials reported that around 308 illegal dwellings were cleared during the operation.

A pattern emerges: The demolition at Ashok Vihar is only one instance in a broader series of evictions taking place across Delhi. In recent weeks, similar drives were carried out in Bhoomiheen Camp, Madrasi Camp, and most recently in Patel Nagar — where nearly 450 jhuggis were razed on June 11. These actions point to what housing rights activists call an escalating city-wide campaign to remove informal settlements under the guise of “urban renewal.”

The demolitions have sparked sharp political reactions. Former Delhi Chief Minister and Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader Arvind Kejriwal took to social media to accuse the BJP-led DDA of reneging on its promise of “Jahan Jhuggi, Wahan Makaan” (where there’s a slum, there’ll be a home). “What does the BJP want — to erase every slum in Delhi? Why did the Prime Minister lie during elections?” former CM Kejriwal posted on X.

आख़िर बीजेपी चाहती क्या है? क्या दिल्ली की सभी झुग्गियाँ तोड़ना चाहती है? तो फिर मोदी जी ने क्या चुनाव के वक्त झूठ बोला था – जहाँ झुग्गी, वहाँ मकान? https://t.co/kE6CLFVwiJ

— Arvind Kejriwal (@ArvindKejriwal) June 16, 2025

AAP’s Delhi unit chief Saurabh Bharadwaj echoed the criticism, alleging betrayal and mass displacement.

भाजपा की सरकार जबसे आई है दिल्ली में गरीबों के घर और रोज़गार दोनों उजाड़े जा रहे है ।

मुख्यमंत्री रेखा गुप्ता पंजाब भ्रमण में लगी हुई हैं और यहाँ दिल्ली में रोज़ बुलडोज़र चलाया जा रहा हैं।

रेखा गुप्ता जी बतायें कि इन ग़रीब लोगों को उजाड़ने से पहले घर कहाँ दिए गए हैं ?

केंद्र… pic.twitter.com/ySJzhSXtXl

— Saurabh Bharadwaj (@Saurabh_MLAgk) June 16, 2025

Former AAP MLA Akhilesh Pati Tripathi was detained by police while protesting against the Wazirpur demolition, further fuelling the political controversy.

भाजपा सरकार के बुलडोज़र का विरोध करने पर पूर्व विधायक अखिलेश पति त्रिपाठी पुलिस की हिरासत में लिए गए

भाजपा सरकार लगातार गरीबों के घरों पर बुलडोज़र चला रही है । pic.twitter.com/y9m3HpWZF1

— Saurabh Bharadwaj (@Saurabh_MLAgk) June 16, 2025

Congress calls for ordinance, cites precedent: As per the Hindustan Times, the Delhi Congress had called on the city’s BJP administration to bring in an ordinance to immediately halt all demolition of slum clusters. Drawing a parallel with a similar move by the Sheila Dikshit-led Congress government in 2011, party leaders said such a step is necessary to prevent a humanitarian disaster.

“Just as the 2011 ordinance saved lakhs of homes, the current BJP government should pass one urgently to protect the poor from becoming homeless,” said Delhi Congress president Devender Yadav, after visiting displaced families in Govindpuri — where nearly 350 homes were bulldozed.

Yadav further alleged that widespread corruption and administrative apathy had excluded long-time residents from the eligibility survey. “People who’ve lived here for 30–40 years were left out deliberately. This, despite court orders in their favour,” he said, as per the HT report. “The BJP doesn’t want to end poverty — it wants to eliminate the poor from the city.”

2. Jamnagar, Gujarat: 7.74 lakh sq. ft. of government land cleared; structure under probe

In Jamnagar, Gujarat, authorities carried out an extensive demolition drive in the Bacchunagar area on June 15, clearing nearly 7.74 lakh square feet of what they described as illegally occupied government land. The cleared land, estimated to be worth approximately ₹193 crore, was reclaimed by a joint operation involving the Jamnagar district administration and police, amid tight security and logistical coordination.

During the course of the operation, as per the report of India Today, officials came across a large structure concealed from public view. Spread over 11,000 square feet, the structure bore the features of a religious site (dargah), and was built with marble flooring, several rooms, and a specially equipped bathing facility. The high-value construction, reportedly erected without authorisation, immediately drew the attention of the district authorities.

The Superintendent of Police, Premsukh Delu, stated that while there were signboards prohibiting donations and access to outsiders, the source of funding for the construction remains unclear. “The nature of the building and its lack of transparency regarding access or finance has raised suspicion. We are currently investigating whether the structure was being used for activities beyond religious purposes,” Delu said, as per Times of India.

A formal inquiry has been initiated to determine ownership, the legality of the construction, and potential links to unlawful activities, if any. Authorities have stated that the building was not listed in official land use records and had no apparent legal sanction for occupation of public land.

This operation is part of a wider effort by the Gujarat administration to remove what it categorises as unauthorised encroachments on state-owned land. The Jamnagar district collectorate has said that further reviews of government land titles in the region are underway, and additional demolitions may follow if more violations are identified.

3. Govindpuri, Delhi: 300+ jhuggis demolished amid heatwave

In the early hours of June 11, 2025, bulldozers rolled into Bhoomiheen Camp, a longstanding informal settlement in Govindpuri, South-East Delhi, as part of a demolition operation conducted by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA). The drive began around 5:00 a.m., catching many residents off guard. By noon, under a red alert heatwave with temperatures exceeding 45°C, hundreds of families were left out in the open, their homes razed to the ground.

DDA cites court orders, says most structures were ‘uninhabited’: As per the report of The Hindu, the DDA claimed that the demolition was carried out strictly on government land encroached by 344 jhuggi structures. In its statement, the authority said that notices were issued on June 9, giving a three-day window for residents to vacate. The DDA further stated that no court stay order was in effect, and that many of the demolished structures were “uninhabited.”

However, visuals from the ground and testimonies from residents contradicted these assertions, with dozens of families scrambling to retrieve belongings as their homes were torn down. Many affected families are migrant workers and daily-wage earners who have been living in the camp for years, some for decades.

AAP questions BJP-led government’s credibility: The demolition triggered immediate political backlash. Atishi, senior AAP leader and Leader of Opposition in the Delhi Assembly, directly called out Chief Minister Rekha Gupta, questioning her credibility. In a pointed post on X (formerly Twitter), she wrote:

“BJP’s bulldozer started running in the Bhoomiheen camp from 5 a.m. this morning. Rekha Gupta — you said three days ago that not even a single slum would be demolished. Then why are bulldozers running here?”

ग़रीब विरोधी पार्टी है बीजेपी

मुख्यमंत्री रेखा गुप्ता जी ने कहा था, दिल्ली में एक भी झुग्गी को छुआ तक नहीं जाएगा लेकिन आज यहां भूमिहीन कैंप पर सुबह 5 बजे से बुलडोजर चल रहा है।

बीजेपी की DDA और दिल्ली सरकार ने कोर्ट में अपने बड़े-बड़े वकील इन गरीबों के ख़िलाफ़ खड़े किए और कहा… pic.twitter.com/ob2PNKrGcj

— AAP (@AamAadmiParty) June 11, 2025

ये है भाजपा का असली चेहरा।

गरीबों से वोट लेकर फिर उन्हें ही बेघर कर देना। सुबह 5 बजे बुलडोज़र लेकर भूमिहीन कैंप पहुँची बीजेपी सरकार ने हज़ारों गरीबों के आशियाने उजाड़ दिए। बीजेपी को न गरीबों की परवाह है, न इंसानियत की।

बीजेपी का ‘जहां झुग्गी-वहां मकान’ का वादा अब ‘जहां… pic.twitter.com/GseSRgiz2H

— Atishi (@AtishiAAP) June 11, 2025

Former CM Atishi had visited the Bhoomiheen Camp the previous day and was reportedly detained by police while meeting residents, though police later denied the detention.

In response, Chief Minister Rekha Gupta reiterated that the state government could not defy court-directed demolitions, and maintained that alternative accommodation had been provided. However, no data was shared about how many residents had actually been rehabilitated before the eviction.

The timing of the demolition — amid a red alert heatwave issued by the India Meteorological Department — had drawn condemnation. The IMD’s red alert for Delhi explicitly warned of potential “heat illness and heatstroke in all age groups”, particularly for people without access to adequate shelter.

4. Jangpura, Delhi: 50-Year-Old Madrasi camp demolished, over 150 families left without homes

On June 1, 2025, authorities demolished the decades-old Madrasi Camp settlement in Jangpura, South Delhi, displacing hundreds of Tamil-origin residents who had lived there for over five decades. The demolition was carried out in compliance with a Delhi High Court order citing flood risk concerns ahead of the monsoon, as the settlement was situated along the Barapullah drain.

The cluster had become a well-established working-class neighbourhood, housing 370 families, many of whom worked in the informal economy and public services. But as bulldozers flattened the area, questions have emerged over the legality, adequacy, and humanity of the rehabilitation process — and whether the state’s actions respected the displaced community’s rights.

Government claims vs ground reality: In the immediate aftermath of the demolition, Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta defended the operation, stating to the media that, “No one can defy court orders. Residents of that camp have been allotted houses and shifted.”

However, examination of the figures contradicts the government’s blanket assurance of rehabilitation. As per the report of The Wire, while the state claimed that all affected households were relocated to EWS (Economically Weaker Section) flats in Narela, only 189 of the 370 families were initially allotted flats. A further 26 families were later given accommodations. That leaves at least 155 families — over 40% of the entire community — without any alternative shelter.

These residents have been rendered homeless despite having lived in the settlement for decades, raising serious questions about the eligibility criteria, the documentation required, and whether the state fulfilled its legal obligation to ensure prior resettlement before demolition, as per judicial precedents and guidelines laid down in various Supreme Court judgments.

Historical and social context ignored: Madrasi Camp had been one of Delhi’s oldest informal settlements, inhabited primarily by Tamil-speaking Dalit and working-class communities, many of whom had migrated during the 1970s and 1980s for employment in the city. Despite their long-standing presence, residents alleged that they were not given sufficient prior notice, and that the verification process for rehabilitation was flawed and opaque, leaving hundreds ineligible due to technicalities.

The lack of transparency, participation, and timely redressal in these drives has raised serious concerns about the urban poor’s right to housing, especially in a city where informal settlements often fill the vacuum left by inadequate public housing policies.

5. Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh: GNIDA plans demolition of over 20 alleged informal colonies

The Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (GNIDA) has announced a major demolition campaign targeting more than 20 alleged informal settlements and unauthorised constructions across its jurisdiction. The clearance drive, expected to begin in late June or early July 2025, will be carried out jointly with the district administration and police, and will involve heavy machinery and on-ground security deployment.

While officials describe the campaign as a necessary step to “bring discipline and fairness in land use”, local activists and housing rights groups have raised concerns over the absence of rehabilitation guarantees or transparency in verifying whether affected residents were knowingly complicit in the alleged violations.

According to GNIDA’s Additional CEO, Sumit Yadav, the authority has prepared a ward-wise list of all areas marked for action. “Despite regular advisories and warnings, illegal colonies have continued to proliferate,” Yadav said as per a HT report, adding that earthmovers will be used to clear structures built without formal approval.

Many of the settlements now facing demolition were established after agricultural land was illegally sold and converted into residential plots by private colonisers — often without informing buyers that the land was not approved for habitation under the city’s master plan. Residents, many of whom have invested their life savings, now face eviction without clarity on alternative arrangements or accountability for the fraudulent transactions.

GNIDA claims that it acquires land from farmers under planned urban development schemes, in accordance with a notified master plan that demarcates zones for roads, utilities, and various types of land use. “Plots are meant to be allocated for approved residential, industrial, institutional, and commercial purposes. But certain colonisers have been subverting this by carving out unauthorised colonies and misleading buyers,” a senior official said, according to the HT report.

The authority said the decision to launch this campaign was taken after a recent inter-departmental strategy meeting, and that strict action would be taken not only against settlers but also against land mafias and intermediaries involved in the unauthorised conversion and sale of land.

In response to anticipated backlash, the authority has urged citizens to verify land status before purchasing plots, pointing them to the GNIDA website and land records department for ownership and land use verification. However, critics argue that such post-facto advisories offer little solace to low-income buyers now facing homelessness.

The upcoming clearance operation forms part of a wider pattern of urban land enforcement seen across Indian cities, where rapid development pressures and speculative real estate markets have frequently clashed with housing rights and the reality of widespread informal urbanisation.

Cases concerning demolitions before Courts:

1. Supreme Court upholds Bombay HC’s demolition order in case involving land mafia and illegal construction

In a significant development, the Supreme Court on June 17, 2025, upheld the Bombay High Court’s interim order directing the demolition of 17 illegally constructed buildings in Thane, Maharashtra—structures alleged to have been built by builders with links to the underworld, and without any sanction or ownership over the land.

A bench comprising Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Manmohan dismissed a special leave petition filed by a flat purchaser who contended that she and other innocent buyers—over 400 families—were being rendered homeless despite no wrongdoing on their part. The petitioner also highlighted that she was a senior citizen who had made representations to multiple state authorities, including the Chief Minister, but had received no redressal.

However, the Court declined to intervene, observing that the buildings were constructed on third-party land without any approvals, and backed the Bombay High Court’s strong stance against what it described as a “land mafia” operation that had flourished due to state inaction and complicity.

As per LiveLaw, Justice Manmohan had remarked: “Kudos to the High Court for taking a right decision… there is no rule of law when such massive illegal constructions come up with underworld backing. Unless action is taken against these unscrupulous builders, this will continue — people will keep fighting gorilla battles using the shoulders of innocent buyers. That must stop.”

Justice Bhuyan questioned how individuals were able to purchase flats in such projects without proper documentation, suggesting buyers must seek redress against the builders in appropriate forums.

Notably, the Bombay High Court, in its June 12 order, had acknowledged the plight of the petitioner but noted that: “Such construction could not have come up except with the blessings of the government and municipal officers… It is shocking that such brazen illegalities were allowed to persist, ultimately defrauding innocent flat purchasers.”

The High Court had empowered the Thane Municipal Corporation (TMC) to proceed with the demolition without waiting for further orders, given the scale of illegality and the urgency of reclaiming the encroached land. The original writ petition in the High Court was filed by a woman who claimed ownership over the encroached land, and alleged that unauthorised five-storey structures had been erected by the land mafia in violation of planning laws. Although the petitioner before the Supreme Court was allowed to withdraw the plea with liberty to approach the High Court, the interim demolition order continues to stand, signalling a tough judicial posture against illegal construction and official collusion.

2. Supreme Court stays Dargah demolition for 7 days, allows trust to seek recall of Bombay HC order

In a significant intervention on June 17, the Supreme Court stayed the demolition of a disputed dargah structure in Thane for a period of seven days, offering a limited but crucial window of relief to the Pardeshi Baba Trust, which has been locked in a long-standing legal battle over the structure’s legality. A vacation bench of Justices Sandeep Mehta and Prasanna B Varale passed the interim order while hearing a special leave petition challenging the Bombay High Court’s recent demolition directive.

The case centres on a shrine in Thane, which, according to official records and court proceedings, originally occupied just 160 square feet. Over the years, the structure is alleged to have expanded without necessary municipal approvals, eventually occupying a built-up area of over 17,610 square feet. The land itself is private, and the expansion has been challenged by the original landowner, setting off a prolonged legal conflict that has played out across multiple forums over the last two decades.

In its recent order, the Bombay High Court had strongly rebuked both the Trust and the Thane Municipal Corporation (TMC). Asper LiveLaw, the High Court labelled the Trust’s actions as “unscrupulous” and accused the civic body of filing “evasive affidavits.” The court directed the demolition of all unauthorised portions of the structure, expressing frustration at what it viewed as blatant land encroachment under the pretext of religious activity. The TMC had earlier filed reports confirming that the expansion had taken place without planning permission and that certain parts of the structure had been rebuilt even after prior demolition action was initiated.

Pardeshi Baba Trust contests order, cites omitted Civil Suit dismissal: Appearing for the Pardeshi Baba Trust, Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi submitted that the Bombay High Court had failed to consider a crucial fact—the dismissal of a related civil suit in April 2025. According to Ahmadi, the Trust had informed the High Court about the suit in its pleadings, but the High Court neither referred to it nor addressed its implications in the demolition order. He argued that the High Court’s failure to engage with this material development severely undermined the fairness of the demolition directive.

According to the report of LiveLaw, Ahmadi also challenged the extent of the alleged encroachment. He contended that the High Court had mistakenly assumed the entire 17,610 sq. ft. to be illegal construction, while in fact, the dispute pertained to only 3,600 sq. ft. He further accused the landowner of exaggerating the extent of the unauthorised area and argued that the demolition order went well beyond the scope of the writ petition.

On the other side, Senior Advocate Madhavi Divan, appearing for the private landowner, strongly defended the High Court’s conclusions. She said the Trust had engaged in a deliberate and systematic land grab under the guise of religion and that the High Court’s remarks were justified. She pointed to municipal inspection reports and photographic evidence showing that the illegal portions had not only been constructed without approval, but some had also been rebuilt in contempt of earlier orders. Divan also accused the Trust of playing procedural games to delay enforcement and shield the encroachment.

Supreme Court criticises omission, offers limited relief: After hearing both sides, the Supreme Court bench expressed concern about procedural irregularities, particularly the Trust’s claim that the High Court had failed to consider the dismissal of the civil suit. Justice Sandeep Mehta called this omission “embarrassing” and noted that had the High Court been made fully aware of the civil proceedings’ outcome, its decision might have been different.

“We propose to give them permission to file a recall in view of the fact that the High Court seems to have omitted to consider the fact of the disposal of the suit,” the bench observed orally during the hearing, as reported by LiveLaw.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed the Trust to approach the Bombay High Court with a recall application and ordered that the demolition be paused for a period of seven days to allow this process to unfold. The Court clarified that it was not deciding on the legality of the construction but only intervening on procedural grounds. It also left open the possibility for the Trust to return to the Supreme Court if the High Court declines to entertain the recall application. The Court made it clear that no further demolition would take place during this interim window. The legal status of the structure, the extent of unauthorised construction, and the validity of past permissions, if any, remain to be conclusively decided.

3. Bombay High Court slaps ₹1 lakh cost on journalist for PIL against SRA Project

On June 17, 2025, the Bombay High Court imposed ₹1 lakh in costs on petitioner Ankush Jaiswal, a self-proclaimed electronic media journalist, for filing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking the demolition of a Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) project in Kandivali (East), Mumbai, which the court deemed to be a gross abuse of the legal process.

A division bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep V. Marne found that the PIL lacked any genuine public interest and was barred by the doctrine of res judicata, since a similar plea filed by the same petitioner had already been dismissed by another bench in September 2022.

The impugned building—comprising six wings—is part of the Bandongri Ekta Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., developed under the SRA scheme. Jaiswal alleged multiple regulatory violations, including failure to maintain statutory distance from the National Highway and non-obtaining of requisite No-Objection Certificates (NOCs) prior to construction.

However, as per LiveLaw, the bench took serious note of the fact that:

• The petitioner approached the court 22 years after the project’s completion,
• He himself resides in the same SRA building that he claimed was “dangerous to life”,
• And that the rehabilitated slum dwellers would be rendered homeless if the court were to entertain such a plea.

The Court remarked that the PIL amounted to a “serious violation of the constitutional guarantee of shelter” for those already rehabilitated and questioned whether Jaiswal sought to push residents back onto the streets under the guise of public interest.

According to LiveLaw, dismissing the petition, the bench observed:

“The petition is an abuse of process. The plea is devoid of public interest and suffers from the bar of res judicata. It is not the function of the court to unsettle rehabilitation that has been completed decades ago, especially at the instance of one who continues to reside in the very building he attacks.”

The Court directed that the cost be recovered from the ₹1 lakh deposit previously made by the petitioner to demonstrate his bona fides, and the sum be transferred to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority (MSLSA).

4. Telangana High Court stays demolition of shopping complex adjacent to Peddapalli Government Hospital

On June 17, 2025, the Telangana High Court passed an interim order suspending the proposed demolition of a shopping complex adjacent to the Peddapalli Government Hospital, offering relief to the petitioner, Kishan Prakash Jhawer, who had filed a writ petition challenging the notice of eviction issued to him by state authorities.

Justice K. Sarath granted the stay after hearing arguments that the demolition was arbitrary, politically motivated, and unsupported by legal justification.

Background of the case

• The petitioner entered into a Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) agreement with the Medical Department in 2007, granting him rights to operate the shopping complex for 25 years.
• On May 22, 2025, authorities issued a notice asking the petitioner to vacate the premises.
• The petitioner’s counsel, Deepak Misra, argued that this notice was based on oral instructions from the local MLA, with no legal basis.
• He also highlighted that separate proceedings were initiated in July 2024 for demolition and reconstruction of the dilapidated hospital building, not the shopping complex.

Petitioner’s arguments

• The notice lacked legal authority and cited no formal decision or government order mandating the shopping complex’s demolition.
• The shopping complex was an independent structure, not part of the old hospital building slated for reconstruction.
• The impugned action was arbitrary, motivated by political influence, and violative of contractual rights under the BOT lease.

Court’s order: Justice K. Sarath observed that a prima facie case was made out by the petitioner and stayed the proposed demolition until further hearing.

The Court emphasised that demolition of a separate, lawfully leased structure under the pretext of hospital redevelopment requires proper legal procedure, and politically driven oral instructions cannot override statutory contracts.

5. Delhi High Court grants interim relief against demolition in Batla House

On June 16, 2025, the Delhi High Court granted interim protection against demolition to six properties in the Batla House locality of Okhla, South East Delhi, in response to petitions filed by residents challenging the legality of notices issued by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA).

Justice Tejas Karia directed that status quo be maintained until the next date of hearing and issued notice to the DDA, requiring a response within four weeks. The matter is scheduled for hearing on July 10, 2025, before the roster bench.

Background of the Dispute: The petitioners — Heena Parveen, Jinat Kausar, Rukhsana Begam, Nihal Fatima, Sufiyan Ahmed, Sajid Fakhar, among others — approached the Court after receiving generic demolition notices from DDA in May 2025, targeting properties allegedly situated within Khasra Number 279.

Their core arguments included:

• Lack of demarcation: Petitioners argued that not all properties within Khasra No. 279 are illegal, and some lie outside its boundary. The DDA had failed to provide precise demarcation or individualised assessment in the notices.
• PM-UDAY scheme coverage: Several petitioners claimed their properties were covered under the PM-UDAY scheme, which provides a framework for legalising unauthorized colonies in Delhi.
• Historic occupancy: Some petitioners, such as Nihal Fatima, claimed residence in the area since 1980–82, asserting that the structures were purchased from builders and were supported by documents — albeit some in Urdu and Farsi, which were later translated.

DDA’s stand and Supreme Court reference: The DDA’s standing counsel opposed the plea, arguing that the demarcation report had already been submitted before the Supreme Court, and a demolition order dated June 4, 2025, was passed based on that.

However, the High Court referred to the Supreme Court’s earlier order of May 7, which clarified that occupants were free to seek appropriate legal remedies, thereby legitimising the High Court’s jurisdiction in entertaining the present petitions.

The Court also referenced a June 4 order in Ishrat Jahan’s case, where it had directed the DDA to file a detailed affidavit on demarcation and proposed action, due within three weeks.

Related:

Bulldozer Justice: How Unlawful Demolitions are Targeting India’s Marginalised Communities

India: A deep dive into the legal obligations before “deportation”

Public officials must face accountability for unlawful demolition actions, rule of law to be upheld: Supreme Court

Bulldozer Justice: SC orders Rs 25 Lakhs interim Compensation for illegal demolition by UP Govt in 2019

The post Razed to the ground, taken to Court: The legal and social fallout of India’s demolition drives appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Mr. Bhamre was the candidate who had secured the second highest votes. The elected candidate secured 5,83,866 votes while the petitioner secured 5,80,035 votes. He lost by a narrow margin of 3,831 votes. Of the six assembly segments that fall in Dhule Parliamentary Constituency, Bhamre focused his election petition on the polling in Malegaon Central segment from where he could muster only 4,542 votes as against over 1.98 lakh votes polled by Bachchav.

In the election petition, Mr. Bhamre claimed that after conducting inquiries, he came to know from the residents of Malegaon and party workers associated with him that votes were polled in the name of persons who were already dead and that these votes are polled in favour of Ms. Bacchav. He claimed that multiple votes under identical names were cast across different booths, also, burkha-clad women were allowed to vote despite their names not being on the electoral rolls, and all these votes were in favour of Ms. Bacchav.  

Ms. Bacchav sought dismissal of the plea, arguing that the petitioner’s allegations were vague and unsupported. “The original election petition does not disclose the source of information from where the election agent of petitioner received information that votes from about six electric voting machines have not been counted.” Bacchav contended that the petition is “not based on verifiable facts but mere assumptions” and “there is no legally admissible evidence or definite pleading to back the charges.” 

A Single Bench judge, Justice Arun R. Pednekar dismissed the petition and noted, “There is no prima facie material to indicate that votes are cast in the name of dead persons. The data was asked from the petitioner and the Election Commission i.e. register maintained under Form 17-A and 17-C of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961 with CCTV footage so as to verify, whether votes are cast in the name of dead persons and multiple votes are cast in the name of same persons at different booths.” 

There is no affidavit by polling agents that they have noticed votes being cast in the name of dead persons or that the polling agent had raised objection to the casting of the votes in the name of dead persons, the order said. Further, the order said that, in the absence of material that can prove that voting took place in the name of dead persons, the judge said, “Thus there is an element of speculation and inquiry by this court at the instance of the election petitioner. The petitioner has placed on record the names of dead persons, whose names continues to be on the electoral roll, so also, has placed names of voters at multiple places. However, there is no evidence that voting has taken place in the name of dead persons or that voting has taken place at multiple places by the same voter.”  

Further, by merely having names of dead persons on the electoral roll, this court will not presume that votes are cast in their names, the court said. “The polling agents in the booth are aware of the votes cast by persons and an affidavit of polling agents present in the polling station stating that votes are cast against the dead persons would at least indicate that voting has taken place against the name of dead persons.” 

In the election petition, the pleadings have to be precise, specific and unambiguous. If the allegations contained in election petition do not set out grounds as contemplated in Section 100 and do not conform to the requirement of Section 81 and 83 of the Act, the election petition is liable to be rejected under Order VII, Rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure, the court observed.  

Dismissing the petition, the court said, “Omission of a single material fact leading to an incomplete cause of action or omission to contain a concise statement of material facts on which the election petitioner relies for establishing a cause of action, would entail rejection of election petition under Order VII Rule 11 read with Section 83 and 87 of the Representation of the People Act.”  

In 2019, the position was slightly different: Subhash Ramrao Bhamre of the BJP emerged victorious with 613,533 votes, while Congress’s Kunal Rohidas Patil secured 384,290 votes, followed by VBA’s Nabi Ahmad Ahmadulla with 39,449 votes. The voter turnout for this election stood at 55.42%. In the 2014 elections, Subhash Ramrao Bhamre also secured victory with 529,450 votes. Congress candidate Amarishbhai Rasiklal Patel was the runner-up with 398,727 votes, and BSP’s Yogesh Yashwant Ishi came in third with 9,897 votes. The voter turnout was slightly higher at 58.65%.

Related:

India’s election system is being weaponised, will the Opposition act?

Transparency demand Maharashtra: Prominent leaders among 104 seeking EVM–VVPAT inspection

Markadwadi, Pune, Sholapur, Akola, are protests against ECI mounting in Maharashtra?

Congress raises alarm over manipulated voter rolls in Maharashtra Assembly elections

The post Bombay HC: No indication votes cast in name of dead in Dhule, 2024 Lok Sabha polls appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The post Queer Indians Forge Alternative Careers Amid Workplace Discrimination appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Recent months have laid bare a chilling pattern of brutal rapes and assaults across Rajasthan, each incident a stark testament to a deeply entrenched societal malaise.

From the unimaginable violation of a female patient within the sterile confines of an ICU in Alwar, subjected to rape by hospital staff while undergoing treatment, to parallel and equally horrific occurrences echoing from Bikaner, Barmer, and Tonk even in the state capital, Jaipur.

Alwar: Female patient raped inside hospital ICU, fearing Job losses staff, asked for forgiveness

On June 4, 2025, in a deeply disturbing incident, a female patient in the ICU of ESIC Medical College Hospital in Alwar’s MIA area was allegedly raped by a nursing staff member. The incident occurred around 1:30 AM on June 4, 2025. The 32-year-old victim, who had been admitted on June 2 for a tubal operation and moved to the ICU on June 4, recounted the horrifying ordeal to her husband the following day after regaining consciousness.

According to Police, the victim’s husband filed a report stating that a guard had asked him to leave the room around 11 p.m. on June 4, after which the nursing staffer entered. The victim’s husband further detailed that his wife was not fully conscious or able to move, preventing her from resisting the assault by the nursing staff member, who had drawn a curtain around her. The rapist reportedly told her he was a doctor performing an operation.

Accused confessed to the crime in front of doctor

On June 6, the accused nursing staff member, identified as Subhash Gathala from Sikar, confessed to the crime in front of Dr. Deepika. ESIC Medical College Dean Aseem Das confirmed that a case has been registered, and an administrative inquiry team has been formed. The victim’s family registered a complaint at MIA Police Station, and police are investigating.

Alarmingly, hospital staff allegedly attempted to cover up the incident, telling the victim’s husband to “forgive him, or others will lose their jobs.” The husband, however, insisted on going directly to the police. A critical security lapse was also uncovered: the ICU, a highly sensitive area, had no CCTV cameras, as Hindi newspaper Dainik Bhaskar reported

The hospital guard admitted that while shifts change and staff are present, there are no cameras. Police investigation revealed that Gathala, originally posted elsewhere, was temporarily stationed in Alwar on a “diversion.” Police have registered a case and are investigating the matter, taking statements from both the hospital administration and the victim.

State Congress leaders and LoP criticised BJP-ruled state government

Following these alarming incidents, former Chief Minister and prominent Congress leader Ashok Gehlot sharply criticised the BJP-ruled state government.

He took to his social media handle, X, to express his dismay, stating, “During the tenure of the Congress government, the health model of Rajasthan became a topic of discussion in the country and the world, but the BJP government has ruined it. The incidents of rape of a female patient in the ICU of a hospital in Alwar and the incidents of misbehaviour and assault by a doctor on a Dalit Congress leader in a government hospital in Pali are examples of this. The people of the state are regretting that more than half of the tenure of such an inefficient government is still left. How bad will be the condition of the state in this time.”

कांग्रेस सरकार के कार्यकाल में राजस्थान का हेल्थ मॉडल देश-दुनिया में चर्चा का विषय बना था परन्तु भाजपा सरकार ने इसे बर्बाद कर दिया है।

अलवर में अस्पताल के आईसीयू में महिला रोगी से रेप की घटना तथा पाली के सरकारी अस्पताल में कांग्रेस की दलित नेता के साथ डॉक्टर द्वारा बदसलूकी एवं…

— Ashok Gehlot (@ashokgehlot51) June 7, 2025

Rajasthan Pradesh Congress Committee President Govind Singh Dotasra also targeted the government, posting on social media that “the entire Rajasthan is ashamed by the atrocity committed by the nursing staff against a woman admitted in the ICU of a medical college in Alwar. This incident, which crosses all limits of barbarism, is a blot on humanity.”

He urged the Chief Minister to “wake up from deep sleep and see that every day in the state, innocent little girls are being raped, and the dignity of women is being torn apart. Under your misgovernance, cases of atrocities against minors have increased by over 18% from 2023 till now. It is shameful that everyone from ministers to the Chief Minister is intoxicated with power. There is no such thing as women’s safety, sensitivity, or good governance left. The situation is getting worse, but there is no one to see or listen.”

अलवर में मेडिकल कॉलेज के ICU में भर्ती महिला के साथ नर्सिंग स्टाफ द्वारा की गई दरिंदगी से पूरा राजस्थान शर्मसार है। हैवानियत की सारी हदें पार करने वाली यह घटना मानवता पर कलंक है।

मुख्यमंत्री जी, गहरी नींद से जागिए और देखिए प्रदेश में हर दिन छोटी-छोटी मासूम बच्चियों से बलात्कार… pic.twitter.com/y9hZoyPJYG

— Govind Singh Dotasra (@GovindDotasra) June 7, 2025

Adding his voice to the growing condemnation, Leader of Opposition Tikaram Juli took to X (formerly Twitter) to express his outrage. He wrote that “the heinous incident of rape of a victim woman by nursing staff in the ICU of ESIC Medical College in Alwar has shaken the entire state.”

हाल-ए-राजस्थान | अस्पताल में महिला से दरिंदगी | अलवर में मानवता शर्मसार

अलवर के ESIC मेडिकल कॉलेज की ICU में भर्ती एक पीड़ित महिला के साथ नर्सिंग स्टाफ द्वारा बलात्कार जैसी घिनौनी घटना ने पूरे प्रदेश को झकझोर कर रख दिया है।

यह प्रदेश की शासन व्यवस्था की विफलता है, जहां पीड़िता…

— Tika Ram Jully (@TikaRamJullyINC) June 6, 2025

Governance failure: safety compromised in sanctuaries

Juli further asserted that this incident signifies “a failure of the state’s governance system, where the victim is unsafe even in a place considered most secure.” He emphasised that “such an inhuman act occurring to a woman in a hospital’s ICU is not just an attack on a single woman, but an assault on the soul of the entire society.”

#WATCH | Alwar, Rajasthan: On alleged rape incident in ESIC Medical College, LoP Tikaram Jully says, “This proves that cases like rape under the rule of Bhartiya Janata Party are also suppressed. They remain unresolved, and if any grievant reaches out to the higher authorities… pic.twitter.com/IdmXwGOp7l

— ANI MP/CG/Rajasthan (@ANI_MP_CG_RJ) June 7, 2025

Bikaner: two minor girls raped by self-proclaimed temple priest, govt demolished illegal encroachments of accused

On June 3, 2025, a shocking incident reported in Bikaner district where two minor girls, aged eight and nine, were sexually assaulted by a self-proclaimed temple priest. The girls had visited a temple near their grandparents’ house when the accused, later identified as Shri Bhagwan, lured them with Prasad and promises of new sandals before committing the heinous act. Upon their return, the terrified girls revealed the ordeal to their family, disclosing how the perpetrator had threatened them with a fodder-cutting sickle, warning them of dire consequences if they spoke out.

Accused’s criminal history and demolition of illegal encroachments

The investigation quickly unearthed the shocking antecedents of the 50-year-old accused, Shri Bhagwan. It was discovered that he was a convicted murderer, having served a 20-year prison sentence for the 1993 murder of five people during a robbery in Bidasar. Despite being sentenced to death by lower courts, his sentence was commuted to 20 years by the Supreme Court, leading to his release in 2013, as reported Dainik Bhaskar

Following his recent arrest for the rape incident, authorities moved swiftly to demolish his illegal ashram in Surjansar village. This structure, built on government land, also housed a temple where he reportedly practiced tantric rituals.

Illegal activities and reclamation of land

The demolition drive, led by Sub-Divisional Officer and Tehsildar of area, revealed further illegalities. Opium and cannabis plants were discovered on the premises, indicating cultivation of narcotics. Additionally, Shri Bhagwan was found to be involved in illegal water siphoning and electricity theft. The operation successfully reclaimed approximately 50 bigha of encroached pasture land, returning it to the Gram Panchayat, as reported

The accused, who had misled villagers under the guise of spiritual healing, was also found to be in possession of weapons, highlighting the extent of his criminal enterprise.

Tonk: minor Dalit girl found after sexual assault

Another case of gang rape has surfaced from a village in the Pachewar police station area of Tonk district, Rajasthan. After the brutal assault, the perpetrators allegedly tied the minor Dalit girl’s hands and feet and abandoned her by the roadside. The victim was discovered unconscious on the night of February 28, prompting a police investigation, as NDTV Rajasthan reported

Authorities have since registered a case under the POCSO Act against four young men. It’s alleged that a neighbouring woman assisted the accused in their heinous crime. Police sources indicate that one of the suspects is from the victim’s village, while the other three reside in Kurad village.

FIR registered against four accused

Malpura DSP Ashish Prajapat confirmed that the victim provided a named complaint against four individuals, also accusing a neighbouring woman of aiding them. The police are actively investigating the matter. According to the victim’s statement to the police, around midnight on February 28, as she stepped out of her house for a short while, three or four individuals abducted her after covering her mouth.

The accused then took her to a shed behind a neighbour’s house where the gang rape occurred. When the minor screamed for help, the neighbouring woman allegedly came out but ignored her pleas and went back inside, emboldening the attackers, as reported

They subsequently tied the girl’s hands, feet, and mouth before leaving her near her home. Police have taken cognizance of the case and initiated investigation.

Barmer: a 31-year-old woman allegedly end her life by suicide after being blackmailed with rape threats and obscene videos

A distressing incident has come to light in Barmer’s Girab police station area, where a 31-year-old woman, a mother of three, tragically ended her life by suicide on June 10, 2025. The woman was found hanged at her home, and initial reports suggest she was driven to this extreme step after allegedly being blackmailed with threats of rape and the circulation of obscene videos.

According to police, the woman was reportedly lured, raped, and filmed by a man from her village, identified as Sumar Khan (name changed). He allegedly continued to exploit and threaten her, with the latest pressure on Tuesday causing her immense distress. The woman’s uncle has since filed a formal complaint against the accused. While the family asserts that the husband had reported the matter to the police in September 2024, claiming no action was taken, police officials state they have no record of such a report. A thorough investigation into the matter is now underway, and the woman’s body has been sent for post-mortem, as per a report in the Times of India.

NCW demands immediate action, takes suo moto cognizance

The National Commission for Women (NCW) has taken suo moto cognizance of this grave Barmer suicide case. On Monday, the NCW chairperson, Vijaya Rahatkar, took to X (formerly Twitter) to announce that she has written to the Rajasthan Director General of Police, urging immediate intervention and a swift inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the woman’s death.

The National Commission for Women has taken Suo Moto cognizance of a deeply disturbing case from Barmer, Rajasthan, where a 31-year-old woman allegedly died by suicide after being blackmailed with rape threats and obscene videos.

Hon’ble Chairperson Smt. Vijaya Rahatkar has…

— NCW (@NCWIndia) June 16, 2025

Jaipur: 21-year-old woman gang-raped in Sanganer

This incident, occurring in March, adds to the disturbing pattern of such crimes. On the evening of Holi (March 14) in Jaipur’s Sanganer area, a 21-year-old married woman was allegedly gang-raped in a secluded farmland. The victim, who had recently moved to Jaipur, had reportedly left her home after a domestic dispute. She was accosted by two youths on a motorcycle who forcibly dragged her into a field and gang-raped her. A third person, who arrived later, fled, as reported

As per the Times of India, the survivor promptly lodged an FIR under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Sections 70 (gang rape) and 126 (wrongful restraint) at Sanganer Sadar police station. Medical examinations confirmed injuries. Police swiftly arrested Puran Yadav (22) and Himanshu Choudhary (19), and a 17-year-old boy was also detained. The investigation is ongoing.

Moreover, Rajasthan is facing an escalating crisis of gender-based violence, making women’s safety a critical concern. Recent months have revealed a chilling pattern of rapes across the state, defying belief. From an unimaginable assault on a patient inside an Alwar ICU to minor girls targeted in Bikaner and Tonk, and a tragic suicide in Barmer linked to blackmail, the scale of the problem is alarming. Even Jaipur has witnessed multiple incidents, including a gang rape.

These pervasive crimes, occurring in seemingly secure places like hospitals and homes, highlight a profound societal and governance failure, demanding immediate and decisive action to protect women and ensure safe public spaces.

Related:

A Pattern of Impunity? This report details horrific crimes against Dalits in UP, Rajasthan, MP and beyond

Statewide Attacks: Caste fury unleashes brute violence against Dalit students

Tribal women paraded, assaulted; nationwide outrage follows

The post Beyond belief: rape incidents spiral, from a hospital ICUs to villages, exposing widespread gendered crimes across Rajasthan appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In the late 1960s, the prevailing opinion among Israeli Shin Bet intelligence officers was that the key to defeating the Palestinian Liberation Organisation was to assassinate its then-leader Yasser Arafat.

The elimination of Arafat, the Shin Bet commander Yehuda Arbel wrote in his diary, was “a precondition to finding a solution to the Palestinian problem.”

For other, even more radical Israelis – such as the ultra-nationalist assassin Yigal Amir – the answer lay elsewhere. They sought the assassination of Israeli leaders such as Yitzak Rabin who wanted peace with the Palestinians.

Despite Rabin’s long personal history as a famed and often ruthless military commander in the 1948 and 1967 Arab-Israeli Wars, Amir stalked and shot Rabin dead in 1995. He believed Rabin had betrayed Israel by signing the Oslo Accords peace deal with Arafat.

It’s been 20 years since Arafat died as possibly the victim of polonium poisoning, and 30 years after the shooting of Rabin. Peace between Israelis and the Palestinians has never been further away.

What Amnesty International and a United Nations Special Committee have called genocidal attacks on Palestinians in Gaza have spilled over into Israeli attacks on the prominent leaders of its enemies in Lebanon and, most recently, Iran.

Since its attacks on Iran began on Friday, Israel has killed numerous military and intelligence leaders, including Iran’s intelligence chief, Mohammad Kazemi; the chief of the armed forces, Mohammad Bagheri; and the commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Hossein Salami. At least nine Iranian nuclear scientists have also been killed.

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly said:

We got their chief intelligence officer and his deputy in Tehran.

Iran, predictably, has responded with deadly missile attacks on Israel.

Far from having solved the issue of Middle East peace, assassinations continue to pour oil on the flames.

A long history of extra-judicial killings

Israeli journalist Ronen Bergman’s book Rise and Kill First argues assassinations have long sat at the heart of Israeli politics.

In the past 75 years, there have been more than 2,700 assassination operations undertaken by Israel. These have, in Bergman’s words, attempted to “stop history” and bypass “statesmanship and political discourse”.

This normalisation of assassinations has been codified in the Israeli expression of “mowing the grass”. This is, as historian Nadim Rouhana has shown, a metaphor for a politics of constant assassination. Enemy “leadership and military facilities must regularly be hit in order to keep them weak.”

The point is not to solve the underlying political questions at issue. Instead, this approach aims to sow fear, dissent and confusion among enemies.

Thousands of assassination operations have not, however, proved sufficient to resolve the long-running conflict between Israel, its neighbours and the Palestinians. The tactic itself is surely overdue for retirement.

Targeted assassinations elsewhere

Israel has been far from alone in this strategy of assassination and killing.

Former US President Barack Obama oversaw the extra-judicial killing of Osama Bin Laden, for instance.

After what Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch denounced as a flawed trial, former US President George W. Bush welcomed the hanging of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein as “an important milestone on Iraq’s course to becoming a democracy”.

Current US President Donald Trump oversaw the assassination of Iran’s leader of clandestine military operations, Qassem Soleimani, in 2020.

More recently, however, Trump appears to have baulked at granting Netanyahu permission to kill Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

And it’s worth noting the US Department of Justice last year brought charges against an Iranian man who said he’d been tasked with killing Trump.

Elsewhere, in Vladimir Putin’s Russia, it’s common for senior political and media opponents to be shot in the streets. Frequently they also “fall” out of high windows, are killed in plane crashes or succumb to mystery “illnesses”.

A poor record

Extra-judicial killings, however, have a poor record as a mechanism for solving political problems.

Cutting off the hydra’s head has generally led to its often immediate replacement by another equally or more ideologically committed person, as has already happened in Iran. Perhaps they too await the next round of “mowing the grass”.

But as the latest Israeli strikes in Iran and elsewhere show, solving the underlying issue is rarely the point.

In situations where finding a lasting negotiated settlement would mean painful concessions or strategic risks, assassinations prove simply too tempting. They circumvent the difficulties and complexities of diplomacy while avoiding the need to concede power or territory.

As many have concluded, however, assassinations have never killed resistance. They have never killed the ideas and experiences that give birth to resistance in the first place.

Nor have they offered lasting security to those who have ordered the lethal strike.

Enduring security requires that, at some point, someone grasp the nettle and look to the underlying issues.

The alternative is the continuation of the brutal pattern of strike and counter-strike for generations to come.

Matt Fitzpatrick, Professor in International History, Flinders University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The post Iran war: from the Middle East to America, history shows you cannot assassinate your way to peace appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Court: Supreme Court of India

Bench: Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih

Date of Order: May 22, 2025

A system on trial

In a powerful assertion of personal liberty over procedural inertia, the Supreme Court of India intervened to grant bail to Lakshya Tawar, a man whose plea for release had been adjourned an astonishing 27 times by the Allahabad High Court. Having already spent over four years in detention, Tawar’s case became a flashpoint for judicial delay. The apex court’s decision was not a commentary on the merits of the criminal allegations against Tawar but a sharp rebuke of a system that allowed a bail hearing—a matter of fundamental rights—to languish indefinitely. “In matters of personal liberty,” the bench led by Chief Justice Gavaideclared in its order, “the High Courts are not expected to keep the matter pending for such a long time and do nothing, except for adjourning from time to time.”^[1] The ruling serves as a critical case study on the judiciary’s role as the ultimate guardian of Article 21 and the dire consequences when procedural delays effectively negate the right to a timely hearing.

The factual background: A labyrinth of deferrals

Lakshya Tawar was arrested, facing serious charges of cheating, forgery, criminal conspiracy under the Indian Penal Code, and corruption under the Prevention of Corruption Act. His bail application was filed in the Allahabad High Court.

What followed was not a swift adjudication but a cycle of repeated deferrals. Over the course of his plea, the matter was adjourned 27 times. During the proceedings, the High Court took note of Tawar’s “long criminal history of thirty-three cases” and, in its order of March 20, 2025, adjourned the case for another two weeks. It directed the trial court to first record the evidence of the complainant before it would reconsider the bail plea. While this might appear as a measure of due diligence, for a man already incarcerated for four years, it represented yet another hurdle in a seemingly endless procedural maze. It was this pattern of delay that propelled the case to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court’s intervention: A decisive rebuke

On May 22, 2025, the Supreme Court expressed its unequivocal disapproval. “How can the high court adjourn a bail hearing 27 times in a matter related to personal liberty?” Chief Justice Gavai pointedly asked. The Court noted that it would “normally not have entertained the matter” challenging adjournments, but the “peculiar facts and circumstances” of this case, namely the extraordinary number of deferrals, demanded an exception.

The Supreme Court’s decision to grant bail was based on a confluence of factors:

1. The Egregious Delay: The 27 adjournments were the primary catalyst, which the Court viewed as a de facto denial of justice.
2. Prolonged Incarceration: Tawar had already been imprisoned for over four years.
3. Fulfilment of High Court’s Condition: The complainant’s evidence—the very reason for the High Court’s last adjournment—had since been recorded.

Finding the High Court’s inaction indefensible, the Supreme Court directly granted bail to Tawar, rendering the application pending before the Allahabad High Court “infructuous.” By doing so, it sent a powerful signal that procedural failings impinging on fundamental rights would not be tolerated.

Upholding the spirit of Article 21

This case is a potent illustration of Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees that no person shall be deprived of their life or personal liberty “except according to procedure established by law.” The Supreme Court’s jurisprudence, notably in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, has established that this procedure must be “just, fair, and reasonable.” The right to a speedy trial, articulated in Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, is a cornerstone of this principle.

The Tawar judgment extends this logic forcefully to pre-trial proceedings. Indefinite detention caused by the repeated adjournment of a bail hearing is a clear violation of fair procedure. By intervening, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that judicial discretion in managing dockets is not absolute and cannot be exercised in a manner that erodes fundamental rights. The maxim “justice delayed is justice denied” is rarely more applicable than when an individual’s liberty is suspended in a state of indefinite judicial limbo. However, whether the Supreme Court and judiciary as a whole will apply this standard in dealing with the delayed bail for political prisoners, especially in the context of cases like Umar Khalid’s is a question that is yet to be answered.

(The author is part of the legal research team of the organisation)

^[1] Para 5, Lakshya Tawar v. CBI[SLP(Crl.) No. 5480/2025

Related:

“Illegal detention cannot be allowed even for a minute”: Gauhati HC orders release of Goalpara man picked up despite complying with bail conditions

SC’s denial of bail to journalist Rupesh Singh once again showcases how the Court looks at bail under UAPA, with varying consistency

The post SC intervenes for personal liberty after HC adjourns a bail application 27 times! appeared first on SabrangIndia.