When he breathed his last some time back, homages poured in from far and wide including the state and the national government. However when I visited his wife Vimla Bahuguna and daughter Madhu Pathak soon after this, they emphasized that what is most important is to honor his ideas and vision. Since then they have continued to work for this cause and their most recent effort is in the form of the book being discussed here. Titled ‘Paharon ki Peera’ (The Agony of the Mountains) this Hindi book containing 43 essays, memoirs and articles of Sunderlal Ji reminds us of the unique writing skills and style rooted in his unending travels ( including very long foot marches all over the vast Himalayan region) and struggles. In her introduction Madhu Pathak has acknowledged the help and encouragement she received from her mother Vimla and from her husband Dr.Bhuvan Chandra Pathak. Kumar Prashant has written an engaging foreword.

This book has Sundrlal Bahuguna’s writing on environment and forests, several pages of his diary, his recollections of various struggles, biographical sketches of great inspirational persons with whom he worked ( including Sridev Suman, Sarla Behan and Mira Behan, as well his observations on various issues of interest and importance. Parts of the book bring back vivid memories of the numerous campaigns and struggles with which he was associated.

The veteran environmentalist and Chipko ( hug the trees movement) activist was also a freedom fighter and regarded Mahatma Gandhi as his most prominent teacher and mentor. He devoted his life to applying principles of non-violent struggles in the context of increasingly important tasks of protecting forests and rivers.

Along with his wife Vimla ( who was more formally trained in Gandhian principles and methods by Sarla Behan, the famous European disciple of Gandhi) , several deeply committed Gandhian activists and villagers of Garhwal region of  Western Himalayas he was involved in many struggles to protect trees marked for felling and to prevent the construction of gigantic dams widely exposed for their serious risks and hazards by senior scientists and experts.

Born in a village along the bank of the Ganges river in Tehri Garhwal , as a schoolboy he met Sridev Suman , a famous freedom fighter who later sacrificed his life during a jail sentence, and decided to follow his example of a deeply committed social life.

After independence Sunderlal and Vimla settled in the remote village of Silyara to serve the villagers of surrounding areas, leading an austere life.

Following the Chinese invasion leading Gandhian  Vinoba Bhave called upon  Gandhian social workers in the Himalayan region to play a wider social role and so now  Sunderlal started travelling more widely  in many parts of Uttarakhand, particularly the Garhwal part. This led to increasing involvement with social and environmental concerns.

Both Sunderlal and Vimla were involved in anti-liquor movements and rights assertion movements of weakest sections which challenged various forms of discriminatory practices. Enduring relationships were established with several younger activists like those in Henvalghati region.

Around the late seventies a series of Chipko movement activities centered in Henvalghati region were launched for saving forests like those of Advani and Salet which generated a lot of enthusiasm. The action shifted then to even more remote forests like those of  Badiyargad, where Sunderlal Bahuguna went on a long fast in a dense forest area in very  difficult conditions and Vimla also followed him there. During a visit to this region to report on this movement, I learnt that Madhu, brave daughter of brave parents, had also plunged into a forest closer to Silyara Ashram to protect the trees being felled there.

Side by side Sunderlal maintained a dialogue with senior persons in the government. The then prime minister Mrs. Indira Gandhi in particular had very high respect for him. Very big success was achieved as the government agreed to stop the green felling of trees in a vast Himalayan area.

Following this success Sunderlal went on a very long and difficult march from Kashmir to Kohima, including Bhutan and Nepal, covering a vast part of the Himalayan region to spread the message of saving forests and environment with the involvement of people. During this march, taken up in several stages, several times he faced threat to life but did not stop and completed the march. This march helped him greatly to known the conditions of people and environment in the Himalayan region to a much wider extent.

He emphasized protection of sustainable livelihoods along with protection of environment. He was involved closely in resisting displacement and organizing forest workers. He was also involved in several constructive activities relating to regeneration of degraded forests.

Soon he was in the thick of the movement for opposing the harmful social and environmental aspects of dam projects in Himalayan region particularly the gigantic and highly controversial Tehri dam project, which was described as a project of unacceptably high hazards even by officially constituted committees. This proved to be a very long and difficult struggle. Sunderlal Bahuguna left his ashram in Silyara and camped on the bank of the Ganges river for a very long time, accompanied by Vimla.

Although this long struggle did not succeed in stopping the high-risk dam, it certainly helped to spread awareness of these important issues far and wide.

Sunderlal Bahuguna became an inspiration source for forest protection and environmental struggles in many parts of India and even abroad. In the Western Ghats region, for instance, he was an important inspiration source for the great Appiko movement for saving forests. He visited the region and this proved to be an important turning point in the mobilization for the movement.

He was honored with several prestigious awards, including the Padma Vibhushan.

He contributed to many constructive causes such as the Bhoodan (gift of land) movement for making available some farmland to landless rural households.

He played a very important role in evolving an alternative development strategy for the Himalayan region rooted in a combination of combining environment protection with sustainable livelihoods.

Some more information on the book (in Hindi)—Paharo ki Peera by Sunderlal Bahuguna ( Selected writings compiled and edited by Madhu Pathak), 266 pages, Price INR 350, Paperback, Published by Samay Sakshay, 15 Faltu Line , Dehradun—248001, India.

The writer is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Vimla and Sunderlal Bahuguna—Chipko Movement and the Struggle Against Tehri Dam Project, Man over Machine-A Path to Peace, Planet in Peril and A Day in 2071.

The post Problems, Struggles and Policy for Himalayan Region as seen in the Writings of Sunderlal Bahuguna appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The case presented a complex legal challenge at the intersection of Articles 14, 15, 21, and 25 of the Indian Constitution, raising questions about equality, religious freedom, and the right to dignity in death.

With the Supreme Court’s two-judge bench issuing divergent opinions, the matter brought to light the judiciary’s struggle to reconcile competing interests. Justice BV Nagarathna delivered a progressive opinion firmly rooted in constitutional values, calling out the State and local authorities for perpetuating discrimination against Christians and emphasising the secular fabric of India.

In contrast, Justice Satish Chandra Sharma’s opinion prioritised public order and adherence to regulatory norms, reflecting a more conservative approach that arguably overlooked the structural inequities at play.

The court’s eventual compromise, directing the burial at a designated Christian graveyard under Article 142, addressed the immediate dispute but left broader constitutional questions unresolved, raising critical concerns about the judiciary’s handling of systemic discrimination.

Justice BV Nagarathna’s opinion: A strong defence of Constitutional values

Justice BV Nagarathna delivered a strongly worded opinion, criticising the State and the gram panchayat for perpetuating discriminatory practices against Christians and undermining constitutional principles. She described the refusal to allow the burial in the village graveyard as “unfortunate, discriminatory, and unconstitutional,” explicitly highlighting its violation of Articles 14 (equality before the law), 15 (prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion), and 21 (right to dignity, which includes dignity in death).

As per the report of LiveLaw, Justice Nagarathna noted that the village panchayat’s actions and the affidavit submitted by the Additional Superintendent of Police (ASP), which opposed the burial, “betray the sublime principle of secularism.”

She observed:

“The refusal to bury the deceased in the ancestral village graveyard violates Articles 21 and 14 and furthers discrimination on the grounds of religion. The State cannot deny equality before the law.” 

According to the LiveLaw report, Justice Nagarathna further criticised the State for failing to act against discriminatory attitudes, asserting that it had abdicated its duty to foster fraternity and ensure equality. It was her opinion that the attitude of the village panchayat gave rise to hostile discrimination, and such an approach betrays the secular fabric of our nation and the duty of every citizen to foster fraternity.

“How could ASP Bastar could give such an affidavit and what was the authority? It betrays the sublime principle of secularism. Secularism along with fraternity is a symbol of brotherhood between all faith and essential for the social fabric of our country and duty is to foster fraternity among different sections,” her opinion said as per Bar and Bench.

Justice Nagarathna proposed a pragmatic solution by allowing the burial on the family’s private agricultural land, emphasising that such a decision would not set a precedent for future claims. She directed the State to provide security to ensure that the burial could proceed peacefully and issued an additional directive requiring the State to earmark burial grounds for Christians across all districts within two months.

“The State must act to ensure that designated burial grounds for Christians are available throughout the State to avoid such controversies in the future.”

Justice Nagarathna invoked the Supreme Court’s past observations on secularism and fraternity, quoting Justice Chinnappa Reddy’s iconic statement in the Bijoe Emmanuel case:

“Our tradition teaches tolerance, our Constitution teaches tolerance, let us not dilute it.”

In short, through her opinion, Justice Nagarathna made the following key observations-

• Upholding secularism: Justice Nagarathna invoked the secular ethos of the Constitution, condemning the exclusionary practices of the gram panchayat and the State’s endorsement of such discrimination. She stressed that secularism entails equal treatment of all faiths and criticised the affidavit submitted by the State police, which explicitly denied burial rights to Christians in tribal burial grounds.
• Right to dignity in death: Justice Nagarathna’s recognition of the right to dignity in death as a part of the broader right to life under Article 21 is a crucial highlight. By directing the burial on private land, she sought to balance individual rights with practical considerations, though this move might inadvertently dilute the case’s central question of access to public burial spaces.
• Critique of Gram Panchayat: Her rebuke of the gram panchayat for “taking sides” underscores the growing politicisation of local governance bodies in communal disputes. However, her reliance on the private land solution, while pragmatic, could be criticised for sidestepping the long-term structural issue of discriminatory burial practices.
• Mandating systemic reforms: Justice Nagarathna directed the State to demarcate burial grounds for Christians across all villages within two months, a step that, while commendable, reflects a reactive rather than proactive approach by the judiciary in addressing systemic inequities.

Justice Satish Chandra Sharma’s opinion: Balancing rights and public order, no matter the cost

In contrast, Justice Satish Chandra Sharma took a more conservative stance, focusing on public order and adherence to existing regulations. He upheld the Chhattisgarh High Court’s decision to deny burial in the village graveyard and ruled that the deceased should be buried in the designated Christian burial ground located 20–25 kilometres away. Justice Sharma argued that burial rights under Article 25 (freedom of religion) must be subject to reasonable restrictions, including public order and State regulations.

“There is no reason why there should be an unqualified right to burial. Sweeping and illusionary rights can lead to public order disruption. Maintenance of public order is in the larger interest of society.”

As per the report of Bar and Bench, Justice Sharma also dismissed the argument that burial in the village graveyard was a constitutional entitlement, stating:

“The right to religious freedom under Article 25 cannot be stretched to claim a blanket right to be buried in grounds earmarked for another religion.”

Justice Sharma, according to LiveLaw, reasoned that the availability of a designated Christian burial ground nearby was sufficient to satisfy the petitioner’s rights, noting that burial grounds are traditionally designated for specific communities to avoid conflicts.

“To claim Article 25 rights to burial in areas designated for another faith would be stretching the right beyond reasonable limits. The State can frame regulations to maintain public order.”

Justice Sharma’s opinion ultimately prioritised regulatory uniformity and social harmony over addressing systemic discrimination, a perspective criticised for lacking sensitivity to the petitioner’s plight and the broader implications for minority rights. In short, through his opinion, Justice Sharma made the following key observations-

• Deference to local practices: Justice Sharma’s reliance on the High Court’s reasoning—that burial grounds are designated for specific communities—risks legitimising exclusionary practices rooted in social prejudice. By framing the dispute as a matter of public order, his judgment arguably prioritised societal biases over constitutional values.
• Regulatory formalism: His rejection of burial on private land and insistence on using the designated Christian burial ground in Karkapal highlights a strict adherence to regulatory frameworks. However, it also underscores a reluctance to question systemic discrimination in such frameworks, even when they conflict with fundamental rights.
• Public order vs. individual rights: While public order is a valid constitutional limitation under Article 25, Justice Sharma’s reasoning effectively places an undue burden on minority communities, forcing them to accept segregationist practices. This approach risks emboldening majoritarian pressures, particularly in deeply polarised societies.

Article 142 directions: A compromise that misses the larger picture

The Supreme Court’s decision to invoke Article 142 to direct the immediate burial of the deceased at the designated Christian graveyard in Karkapal reflects a pragmatic approach to resolving the immediate dispute.

While this direction ensured that the petitioner could proceed with the burial without further delay, it falls short of addressing the deeper constitutional and social issues raised by the case. The Court’s reliance on Article 142 to avoid a prolonged legal battle highlights an attempt to balance competing interests, but it also exposes significant gaps in judicial engagement with structural discrimination.

One of the most troubling aspects of this compromise is the Court’s avoidance of the core constitutional issues at stake. Instead of referring the matter to a larger bench to decisively address whether the denial of burial rights in the village graveyard amounted to unconstitutional discrimination, the Court settled for an ad hoc resolution. This avoidance not only leaves the fundamental question of the constitutionality of such practices unanswered but also risks setting a precedent where urgent cases involving marginalised communities are reduced to temporary, case-specific solutions. By failing to engage with the broader principles of equality and secularism, the Court missed an opportunity to lay down a robust precedent that could guide future disputes of a similar nature.

The compromise also reinforces the marginalisation of minority voices. By directing burial at a designated Christian graveyard far from the petitioner’s village, the Court effectively sidelined the petitioner’s plea for equal treatment and dignity. This resolution sends a message that minority communities must navigate systemic biases rather than challenge them outright. The petitioner’s demand for burial in the village graveyard was not just a logistical issue but a symbolic assertion of equality and belonging. The Court’s failure to address this demand perpetuates the notion that minorities must acquiesce to discriminatory practices, thereby entrenching their exclusion from shared communal spaces.

While the invocation of Article 142 served to bring an end to the immediate crisis, the compromise falls short of delivering substantive justice. It highlights a judicial tendency to focus on expediency at the expense of confronting structural inequalities, leaving marginalised communities to grapple with the long-term consequences of systemic discrimination.

Critical reflections: Judicial challenges in addressing discrimination

The Supreme Court’s handling of the burial dispute raises important concerns about the judiciary’s approach to balancing constitutional values against public order, systemic discrimination, and local governance. A closer examination of the case reveals troubling trends that demand critical scrutiny.

First, Justice Sharma’s emphasis on maintaining public order over upholding individual rights reflects a growing judicial inclination to privilege peace and harmony over addressing the legitimate grievances of marginalised communities. While public order is undoubtedly an important consideration, prioritising it in this manner risks reinforcing entrenched biases rather than dismantling them. In cases involving historically marginalised groups, such an approach undermines the transformative potential of the Constitution by legitimising social hierarchies under the guise of pragmatism.

Second, the Court’s avoidance of structural issues highlights a broader hesitation to confront systemic inequities. By focusing on short-term solutions, such as imposing a two-month deadline for demarcating burial grounds for Christians, the Court addressed only the immediate logistical concerns without tackling the underlying issues of social exclusion and prejudice.

The decision stops short of questioning whether the segregation of burial grounds is constitutionally permissible, thereby missing an opportunity to challenge practices that perpetuate discrimination.

Third, the case underscores the politicisation of local governance bodies, which often act as enforcers of communal divides rather than mediators of inclusive policies. Instead of protecting the rights of all citizens, these institutions have increasingly become instruments of exclusion, driven by majoritarian pressures. The judiciary must play a more active role in holding local governance bodies accountable to constitutional principles, ensuring they act as facilitators of inclusion rather than agents of division.

Finally, the intersection of caste, religion, and conversion brought to light by this case reveals the persistent hostility faced by tribal Christians. These individuals often occupy a precarious position, trapped between their ancestral identity and their chosen faith. Conversion to Christianity frequently becomes a basis for denying them access to ancestral land or communal spaces, exacerbating their social exclusion.

The judiciary must ensure that constitutional protections extend to all citizens, irrespective of their faith or choice to convert, and that conversion does not become an excuse for perpetuating discrimination.

Together, these reflections highlight the need for a more proactive and transformative judicial approach to address structural inequalities and protect the rights of marginalised communities.

Broader implications: The judiciary’s role in addressing systemic discrimination

The split verdict in this case underscores the judiciary’s ongoing struggle to reconcile constitutional principles with the realities of an increasingly polarised society. Justice Nagarathna’s dissenting opinion serves as a vital reminder of the judiciary’s fundamental duty to uphold constitutional values and protect the rights of marginalised groups. Her emphasis on equality and non-discrimination reflects the transformative vision of the Constitution, which seeks to dismantle systemic inequities and foster inclusivity.

However, the lack of a decisive resolution on the fundamental issue of discriminatory burial practices reveals the judiciary’s limitations in confronting entrenched societal biases. By failing to refer the matter to a larger bench or deliver a definitive ruling, the Court has missed an opportunity to provide clarity and enforce constitutional safeguards against discrimination.

This case also brings to light the pressing need for legislative reforms aimed at ensuring equal access to public burial grounds for all communities, irrespective of caste, religion, or conversion status. The judiciary’s reliance on public order as a justification for discriminatory practices risks normalising exclusionary behaviour, allowing prejudices to persist under the guise of maintaining peace. Legislative intervention is critical to prevent such misuse of public order and to establish clear, enforceable guidelines that uphold the principles of equality and secularism.

In a country as diverse as India, disputes of this nature challenge the foundational ideals of the Constitution, particularly secularism and equality.

The resolution of such cases serves as a litmus test for the judiciary’s commitment to addressing systemic discrimination and safeguarding the rights of marginalised groups. While pragmatic solutions may provide immediate relief, they fail to address the deeper social and institutional barriers that perpetuate exclusion. To truly uphold constitutional ideals, the judiciary must adopt a more assertive stance, one that not only resolves individual disputes but also challenges the systemic biases that underlie them.

Related:

Sambhal Custodial Death: A systemic failure exposed

Parbhani police under scrutiny: Fact-finding report exposes allegations of brutality, illegality, and constitutional violations

Eradicating Stigma: A Landmark Judgment on Manual Scavenging and Justice for Dalits

The post Constitutional ideals vs. public order: SC delivers split verdict on Christian burial rights, fails to confront structural discrimination appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Azoulay called for a “thorough and transparent investigation” into Chandrakar’s death, urging authorities to ensure that those responsible are held accountable. “Investigative journalists take great risks to inform society of wrongdoing, and their safety is therefore crucial in empowering populations to safeguard the public good,” she stated.

“I condemn the killing of Mukesh Chandrakar and call for a thorough and transparent investigation to ensure that the perpetrators are brought to justice. Investigative journalists take great risks to inform society of wrongdoing, and their safety is therefore crucial in empowering populations to safeguard the public good.”

• Audrey Azoulay, UNESCO Director-General

Who is Mukesh Chandrakar?

Mukesh Chandrakar, a 32-year-old investigative journalist from Chhattisgarh, was found dead in a septic tank on January 3, 2025, in Bijapur, after being missing since New Year’s Day. Known for his fearless reporting on corruption in road construction projects and the Maoist conflict in the Bastar region, Mukesh’s tragic death is suspected to be linked to his exposure of a corruption scandal. His body was discovered in the compound of Suresh Chandrakar, a contractor involved in road projects, under fresh concrete slabs.

Mukesh’s rise to prominence was marked by his unique path to journalism, transitioning from selling mahua liquor and working as a mechanic to creating the popular YouTube channel Bastar Junction, which gained 1.66 lakh subscribers. His reports on poorly maintained roads, particularly in Bijapur, led to official inquiries. His cousin, contractor Suresh Chandrakar, allegedly orchestrated the murder after being angered by Mukesh’s reporting. Mukesh’s brother, Yukesh, revealed in a heartfelt video on the channel that Mukesh had been receiving threats prior to his death.

Days after a Chhattisgarh-based journalist was found murdered, the key suspect in the murder of Bastar journalist and YouTuber Mukesh Chandrakar, Suresh Chandrakar, was arrested by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) of the Bijapur police from Hyderabad on the night of January 5, 2025. Police confirmed the arrest after the body of Mukesh was discovered on January 3, hidden in a septic tank at a property owned by Suresh in Chattanpara Basti, Bijapur. Three others involved in the crime—Ritesh Chandrakar, Dinesh Chandrakar, and supervisor Mahendra Ramteke—have already been arrested in connection with the case and remanded to police custody by the Court.

The incident sparked widespread protests and seeking justice for Chandrakar. The Editors Guild and the Press Club of India also condemned the murder, concerning the dangers faced by journalists in conflict zones.

Chandrakar’s Postmortem: fractures to head, heart ripped out, broken neck

The Postpartum report of Mukesh Chandrakar revealed the shocking details in the killing of journalist. Chandrakar had 15 fractures to his head and his heart being ripped out. Chandrakar’s neck was also broken, reported the Free Press Journal. As per report, doctors also found pieces of liver and five broken ribs. After the postmortem, the doctors believed that there must have been two people involved in killing the 28-year-old journalist.

Prime suspect in Chandrakar’s murder withdraws ‘big amount’ from bank, SIT reveals

The SIT, in its statement, said that during the investigation and based on information from the banks, the prime accused, Suresh Chandrakar, had withdrawn a large sum of money from his account on December 27, four days before the incident. This matter is currently under investigation, SIT said.

However, when asked about the amount of money withdrawn from Suresh’s bank account, a senior police officer stated that it was a subject of investigation. ““Revealing the amount would hamper our investigation at this stage but money trail is being investigated,” he said, according to the Indian Express.

Asthi Kalash (urn with ashes) shattered and lying spread on the ground

In a disturbing turn of events, the disintegrated ‘Asthi Kalash’ (urn containing ashes) of journalist Mukesh Chandrakar was found scattered near the cremation ground in Bijapur district, Chhattisgarh, about 50 meters from its original location.

On January 19, when Chandrakar’s family arrived at Muktidham, they discovered that the ‘Asthi Kalash’ had gone missing from its designated spot. A subsequent search in the vicinity led them to the shattered urn, with ashes scattered across the ground. Police confirmed the discovery, though no immediate explanation has been given for the urn’s disintegration, reported Indian Express.

Mukesh Chandrakar’s cousin, Yukesh Chandrakar, took to his X handle @youareYukesh to express his anguish. He said that, “We had kept Mukesh’s ashes, someone broke the urn and scattered the ashes. Today the ritual of immersion of Mukesh’s ashes is to be completed. I came to know from somewhere that my brother was beaten to death and a bulldozer was used on him.

Are we human?”

मुकेश की अस्थियां उठाकर रखी थीं हमने, किसी ने अस्थि कलश को फोड़कर अस्थियां बिखेर डालीं ! आज मुकेश के अस्थि विसर्जन की रस्म पूरी की जानी है । मुझे कहीं से पता चला था कि भाई को अधमरा होने तक मारकर उस पर बुलडोजर चलाई गई थी !
हम इंसान हैं ?@PMOIndia @ChhattisgarhCMO@vijaysharmacg… pic.twitter.com/sbkVuBcMAN

— Yukesh Chandrakar (@youareYukesh) January 13, 2025

The urn was intended for the sacred Asthi Visarjan ritual in Kaleshwaram, Telangana, where the ashes of the deceased are immersed in holy waters.

Chhattisgarh CM announces Rs 10 Lakh aid to Chandrakar’s family

On January 14, Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Vishnu Deo Sai announced an aid of Rs 10 lakh to the kin of murdered journalist Mukesh Chandrakar. Speaking to reporters at the helipad in Police Lines, Sai said, “The family of the deceased journalist will be given ₹10 lakh assistance. A building will be constructed for journalists, and it will be named after him” as Hindustan Times reported

The CM’s announcement that the construction of a dedicated building for journalists in Chandrakar’s name is seen as a tribute to his work and legacy.

Related:

Investigative Journalist Mukesh Chandrakar killed for exposing corruption

Gauri Lankesh assassination: 6 years down, no closure for family and friends, justice elusive

Gauri Lankesh Assassination: Accused denied bail by Aurangabad HC

The post Baster Journalist killing: UNESCO condemned the killing of Mukesh Chandrakar appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The GSRTC conducted an investigation following complaints that several highway hotels, which had Hindu names, were actually run by Muslim proprietors. The licenses were then cancelled, citing reasons such as “misrepresentation” and “unhygienic conditions.” These establishments, located in key districts like Vadodara, Rajkot, Ahmedabad, and Bharuch, were integral stops for GSRTC buses, ensuring a steady flow of customers.

Hotels such as “Hotel Shivshakti” and “Hotel Tulsi” were specifically targeted because their names suggested Hindu ownership, a tactic allegedly used to attract a broader Hindu clientele. Critics, however, argue that the cancellations go beyond mere regulatory enforcement, aiming to marginalize Muslim businesses under the guise of addressing “public misconceptions.”

BIG NEWS Gujarat BJP Govt cancels Bus halt license of 27 Muslim-owned hotels that were using Hindu names.

For example, All the owners and managers of Hotel Shivshakti on are Muslims.

Hotel Tulsi, located on the Surat-Ahmedabad route, is also owned by Muslims.

Permit of… pic.twitter.com/vrsOXV3ez2

— Times Algebra (@TimesAlgebraIND) January 24, 2025

Community backlash

The move has been perceived as part of a growing trend of policies aimed at alienating the Muslim community. Business owners argue that these measures undermine their rights to operate freely in a competitive market, with many pointing out the larger implications of such targeted actions. Muhammad Aslam, a hotel owner from Vadodara, stated, “This action isn’t just about our businesses; it’s an attack on our dignity and identity as Muslims.”

Local leaders and associations have also criticized the government’s approach, calling it a deliberate effort to widen communal divides. Zafar Alam, a community leader, expressed concerns about the divisive implications, emphasizing that such policies erode trust and harmony between communities.

Broader implications

The economic impact of this decision is substantial. By severing these businesses from GSRTC’s bus network, the government has significantly reduced their customer base. Hotel owners are now left grappling with potential financial ruin, particularly in a political climate already challenging for minority communities.

Moreover, the psychological toll on the Muslim community is palpable. Zahida Khan, a resident of Godhra, expressed the emotional strain of such actions: “It’s painful to see our community targeted like this. It’s as if we need to hide our identities to survive.”

A pattern of discrimination?

This incident is not an isolated case. Observers note parallels with similar actions in other states, such as Uttar Pradesh, where Muslim businesses were compelled to publicly display their religious identity. Critics argue that these measures reinforce harmful stereotypes and aim to exclude Muslims from public life under the pretense of regulation.

For instance, during the Kanwar Yatra in Uttar Pradesh, the state government issued directives requiring eateries along the route to display their owners’ names, sparking widespread backlash. Critics labeled the order “communal and divisive,” arguing that it targeted Muslim and Scheduled Caste businesses under the pretext of law and order. Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi called the directive “exclusion by identity,” highlighting its economic and social ramifications. The Supreme Court later paused the implementation of this order, questioning its statutory backing and purpose. Observers noted that this directive forced business owners to reveal their identities, exacerbating existing societal divides and reinforcing systemic biases.

Adding to the growing Islamophobic narrative, certain social media posts further amplify divisive rhetoric. For example, a post by a user named Mr. Sinha on X (formerly Twitter) perpetuates stereotypes and spreads harmful misinformation about Muslims, contributing to the broader atmosphere of hostility. Such posts play a significant role in normalizing discriminatory policies and attitudes

What did you notice?? pic.twitter.com/a9Cxxkpzsd

— Mr Sinha (@MrSinha_) January 24, 2025

It is pertinent to highlight that such actions run contrary to the principles enshrined in Article 15(1) of the Constitution of India, which unequivocally states: “The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.”

The cancellation of licenses for Muslim-owned hotels in Gujarat reflects a concerning trend of discriminatory policies that undermine democratic principles of equality and fairness. By targeting businesses based on their owners’ religious identity, such actions deepen social divides and erode the pluralistic fabric of society. As the affected entrepreneurs face mounting challenges, the incident raises urgent questions about the future of minority rights and economic inclusion in India.

Related:

Gujarat: 108 shrines demolished in Gujarat

Report says 30 Muslim sports coaches and trainers fired without reason in Gujarat

The post Discrimination targets Gujarat’s Muslim businesses appeared first on SabrangIndia.

History of Kumbh Mela

The history of the Kumbh Mela goes back to the Hindu myths of Samudra Manthan, or the churning of ocean, which was done by the Gods and the Demons, to obtain invaluable jewels and amrita, the nectar of immortality. In the churning, the God Dhanvantari appeared with a pot in his hand filled with amrita. The son of Lord Indra, Jayant, saw the pot and snatched it from the hands of God Dhanvantari and ran to prevent the demons from consuming the amrita and becoming immortal. Jayant ran for 12 days, while taking rest at 4 places in a 3 days interval, Haridwar, Prayag, Nashik – Trimbakeshwar and Ujjain. At all these four places when Jayant stopped, he spilled some of the amrita, giving these places mystical powers. All these four places are located at the banks of holy rivers, Haridwar located on the banks of Ganga, Prayagraj has the confluence of the Ganga, Yamuna and the mythical river Saraswati, Ujjain has the Kshipra, and Nashik – Trimbakeshwar has the Godavari, often referred as Ganga of the South. It is believed that by taking a dip in these holy rivers during Kumbh, washes away one’s sins and helps them gain punya (spiritual merit).

As per divine counting, one day for the Gods is considered to be equal to one year for the humans. And therefore, every three years, Kumbh Mela takes place in one of the four cities of Prayag, Haridwar, Nashik – Trimbakeshwar and Ujjain. Normal Kumbh Mela takes place every three years, whereas the Ardh Kumbh Mela is held every six years at Haridwar and Prayagraj, and the Purna Kumbh Mela takes place every four years in one of the four cities based on the locations of planets. The Maha Kumbh Mela takes place once in 144 years at Prayagraj, after 12 Purna Kumbh Melas, as per the official website of the Kumbh Mela.

The location of Kumbh Mela is determined by the location of the Sun, moon and Jupiter in different zodiac signs in that time period.

Maha Kumbh 2025

The festivities and the celebrations in this year’s Kumbh is expected to be more extravagant than all previous iterations. With the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) ruling both in the Centre and the state of U.P., the event is expected to be more overt. The festival is viewed by many to be a potential symbol of Hindu unity and power. Backed by huge state resources and widespread PR campaigns, this year’s Maha Kumbh is expected to be the most expensive on record. Estimated 40 to 45 crore visitors are expected to visit the Maha Kumbh in Prayagraj, as reported by the Economic Times.

As per reports, a sum of 7,000 crore Rupees has been spent by the U.P. State Government on the Maha Kumbh Mela of 2025 on infrastructure projects and sanitation facilities, with nationwide posters of Chief Minister of U.P., Hindu monk Adityanath Yogi, and Prime Minister Narendra Modi on promotional material for the Maha Kumbh, 2025. 

The festival has also become a ground for sowing seeds of communal tensions between Hindus and Muslims thus making it the most polarised Kumbh Mela in history. One of the senior-most priests of the festival, Mahant Durganand Bhramachari, stated that “Kumbh Mela is a great convergence of humans, gods and our sacred rivers”, and expressed concern and dismay over attempts at using the festival to promote sectarianism and religious divide in the country.

He further added stating that “What bothers me this time is how some people are trying to polarise the atmosphere on communal lines. There has to be peaceful coexistence and hate should have no place. We see some people are trying to create Hindu-Muslim tensions,” as reported by the Guardian.

Digital innovations and AI have also been used to help with multiple problems faced by chaotic and large–scale festivities. Thousands of drones have been employed to monitor the security at the celebration. Meanwhile, devotees have each been given radio frequency wristbands to help locate lost family members that might get separated in the crowd.

While the Kumbh Mela is celebrated to promote spirituality, there have been various shortcomings with regards to the organization of the event as well as behaviours of extremist Hindu devotees who have used the festival and attempted to incite communal disparity.

Communal Disparity

The Maha Kumbh which is a spiritual and religious festival for Hindus has sadly become a ground for promoting communal disparity and rising communal tensions due to various instances. Even the Government has diverted its attention from major concerns such as the cleanliness of the rivers Ganga and Yamuna and the efficient management of the Maha Kumbh, towards petty issues creating further rifts between the Hindus and the Muslims. 

• Prohibiting Muslims from participating in the Maha Kumbh

The All India Akhara Parishad (AIAP), which has been formed by the Saints and Sadhus of 13 affiliated Akharas, has been pushing for banning the entry of Muslims and their business participation as well from the Maha Kumbh Mela, 2025. For the first time the AIAP is taking active steps by garnering support of other devotees and saints in banning the participation of Muslims and restricting their business activities in the Mela.

The rationale behind this demand of the AIAP stems out of an incident during the Kanwar Yatra, where allegedly Muslim hotels and restaurants served non-vegetarian food to the devotees taking part in the Yatra, thus hurting their religious sentiment. This, the Akhara Parishad argues, justifies their demands of restricting the participation of Muslims from the Mela.

​​Maulana Mufti Shahabuddin Razvi Barelvi, National President of the All India Muslim Jamaat, has requested the U.P. Government to intervene. He stated that “The Akhara Parishad’s decision is fostering division and promoting communalism. Such actions only serve to create rifts in society. I urge the state government to reverse this decision and take strong action against those spreading communal hatred,” as reported by India Tomorrow.

Shankaracharya Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati, supported the decision of the Akhara Parishad by arguing that just as Hindus are not allowed to visit Mecca and Madina, even Muslims should not be allowed to participate in the Maha Kumbh. He stated that “Mecca and Madina are Muslim sacred sites, and Hindus are restricted from going there. Similarly, the Kumbh is our religious festival; Muslims should have no business being involved.”

While Shankaracharya’s statement provides prima facie support to the claims of the Akhara Parishad, his claims are based on unfounded reasoning. Mecca and Madina are hosted in foreign countries and the Indian Government only exercises jurisdiction over events in India. Furthermore, with India’s history of co–existence between the Hindu and Muslim religions and taking part in each other’s festival, it is only right to allow Muslims to be a part of the biggest Hindu festival of the century.

Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind’s Uttar Pradesh legal advisor, Maulana Kaab Rashidi stated that “Such calls violate the rights enshrined in the Constitution because India is known all over the world as a secular country. So, talking about banning Muslims from Maha Kumbh is like crushing the soul of the Constitution,” as reported by Livemint.

Even the U.P. Chief Minister, Adityanath Yogi has become a part of the controversy as he stated that “Anyone who has respect for India and Sanatan traditions can come to Kumbh….people with bad mentality should not go there….they may face problems,” as reported by the Deccan Herald.

Reference can be made here to Gandhiji’s reflections of the Kumbh Mela of 1915 in his famous book My Experiments with Truth. While traveling from Saharanpur to Kumbh Mela in Haridwar, Gandhiji highlighted the inhumane conditions in which people had to travel. He then went ahead to focus on the prevalent religious prejudices, where orthodox Hindus would not consume water if the person offering them the same was Musalmani. By witnessing the dividing of food and beverages on religious lines, Gandhiji understood the extent of religious polarisation in the country. He expressed his disappointment at such a state of affairs.

These attempts at restricting the entry and business activities of Muslims in the Maha Kumbh furthers the rift between the society and becomes a ground for promoting cultural disparity in a country where different religions and cultures have coexisted for a long time.

• Fake news

Outrage sparked on January 10, 2025, as a man was caught urinating on one of the banners for Maha Kumbh in Raebareli. Media outlets and users of social media soon gave the incident a communal twist, circulating videos of the man being verbally and physically assaulted for his actions.

UttarPradesh.ORG News shared a video of the man being abused on X and said that a man from “another community” was thrashed by locals on accusations of urinating on a poster of Maha Kumbh.

Multiple users shared similar videos of the incident and labelled the man as a Muslim terrorist and expressed their concerns causing outrage over social media handles.

However, on 11 January, 2025, Raebareli police issued a statement clarifying that the name of the accused was Vinod, a Hindu vendor, and the claims that the man belonged to “another community” were entirely false. According to the statement of the Police, the accused was in an intoxicated state and urinated 3-4 feet away from the wall that had the poster and banners of Maha Kumbh, however, people present at the scene soon surrounded him and began accusing him of being from another community and started assaulting him, as reported by ALT News.

Such incidents reflect the deeply entrenched stereotypes and prejudices in the minds of people which get flared up and are exaggerated further by social media posts and false new reporting. A question however arises here, why such accusations are attributed to the Muslim community alone? Why is it that when any miscreant does any action to disturb the peace, the first assumption is made regarding his religion and his labelled as a Muslim terrorist.

There have also been incidents where people have assumed false identities as a Muslim and threatened violence just to worsen the communal rifts in our country. In the first week of January, a post on social media emerged, where a user named Nasar Pathan threatened a bomb blast at the Maha Kumbh taking the lives of at least 1000 devotees. However, after investigation by the Police, it was revealed that a student of class 11th, Ayush Kumar Jaiswal had created this fake account under the name of Nasar Pathan and posted the threat on social media handles, which spread like a wildfire, as reported by The Quint.

This incident is a recent case of a concerning trend where people impersonate themselves as Muslims to spread hateful content, make threats, or commit crimes.

This trend has become a cause of concern as it is being used to spread communal hatred and hamper the societal structure of India.

• Heightened cultural sensitivity amongst Hindus

A man was beaten up by Sadhus at the Maha Kumbh Mela, 2025, for dressing up as a sheikh at the festival. The man, who is a social media influencer, dressed as a sheikh identifying himself as Sheikh Premanand at the festival, to film content. Not much later he caught the attention of Sadhus who found his attire and his behaviour as outrageous towards their religious feelings, and physically assaulted him. His actions were perceived by the Sadhus as offensive towards the holy place and the festival, as reported by Munsif News.

However, this incident raises severe concerns about the declining cultural sensitivities of Hindus, where a man’s attire was enough to be offended upon.

Is our faith in our religion so weak that a man dressed as a sheikh could shake it, and force us to take action against him to protect our religion from his clothes of a different religion?

• Hate Speech

Yati Narsinghanand, a right-wing Hindu priest, has caused an uproar after his recent statements regarding the Maha Kumbh. The priest added another thread to the Islamophobic narrative he has been weaving by making various hate speech comments in the past as well.

The priest said that “This might be the last Maha Kumbh Mela if the population of jihadists increases and they make India an Islamic nation. Even a single temple will not be left.” He further added that “Not just temples, if the number of jihadists increases there will not be a single woman left in your house nor my house.”

The 58–year old priest has faced various criminal cases and complaints for making communally charged statements under the Indian law for hate speech. Despite his Islamophobic and misogynistic comments, Yati Narsinghanand has been allowed to roam scot–free even after having been arrested multiple times, as reported by the Siasat Daily.

On January 21, 2025, two individuals including a journalist were arrested in U.P. for allegedly making offensive comments on Maha Kumbh on social media. The content of the two individuals offended the members of the Hindu community, which led the authorities to issue alerts and increase social media monitoring, as reported by Hindustan Times.

Kamran Alvi, a journalist, was arrested after his remarks were found offensive. SHO Alok Mani Tripathi stated that “The accused was promptly arrested, and a case was registered under section 299 (deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs) of the BNS Act for insulting religious symbols. He will be presented in the court.”

In a separate case, SHO Amit Pratap Singh stated that, “Abhishek Kumar, a resident of Boja village near Jaidpur, made objectionable remarks on social media about Hindu deities and the Maha Kumbh. A case has been registered and the accused arrested.”

Critics have pointed out the double–standards adopted by the Police in dealing with cases regarding hate speech. Individuals such as Yati Narsinghanand roam scot–free and remain outside the reach of law after making hateful comments, whereas reporters from minority communities or even the ones who report instances of hate speech are immediately arrested.

Plight of Sanitation Workers

The Maha Kumbh, 2025, which is expected to have more than 40 crore devotees take a dip in the holy Triveni Sangam, the confluence of Ganga, Yamuna and mythical Saraswati, is the largest ever religious gathering.

The expected footfall poses the significant challenge of sanitation and public health. The organisers have installed more than 1,50,000 temporary toilets across the campsite on the river banks, and more than 5,000 workers have been hired to clean those toilets nearly all of whom belong to the lower rung of the archaic and rigid societal hierarchy that divides Hindus based on their roles and functions in the community. As per the official data, 9 out of the 10 sanitation workers are from marginalized communities, majority of them being Dalit, also known as the “untouchables”, as reported by The Wire.

Cleaning a toilet piled with faecal matter, Suresh Valmiki, a sanitation worker said that “I clean and clean, but people make a mess of it in barely ten minutes.” 

Five years ago, when the festival was held, Prime Minister Narendra Modi washed the feet of five sanitation workers. Many say that the move, which came 3 months before the general election, was an attempt to appeal to Hindu unity casting aside age-old caste differences in the Hindu society. However, not much has changed for the marginalised sanitation workers. 

Pyare Lal, a sanitation worker employed at the Maha Kumbh said that “Now, this grand Maha Kumbh is being organised, there are so many ads of ‘luxurious Kumbh’ but did anything change for us sanitation workers.” He further added, “We have been watching ads for Tent City, but nothing has changed in our tents.” Pyare Lal lives in one corner of the Maha Kumbh in a make-shift tent with no proper supply of electricity or water.

As reported by The Print, several sanitation workers also complained that they applied for a house under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY), however, they have not heard anything back from the authorities, and find their futures bleak.

The jobs of sanitation workers have been made even more difficult as there are no water connections in the toilets, which has been done purposefully by the organisers to avoid the frequent suctioning of the septic tanks. As a result, the users must fill a bucket of water from a tap outside, and to avoid the same, the users carry bottles with them which they dump inside the toilet, increasing the work and difficulty for the cleaners.

A cleaner named Geeta Valmiki said, “People say it’s our job to clean the toilets, so why should they bother?” 

The plight of the sanitation workers highlights the lackadaisical attitude of the Government regarding protecting the basic human rights and the right to dignity of the cleaners. Further, not proper awareness campaigns have been conducted by the Government for the devotees who are visiting the Maha Kumbh, regarding maintaining cleanliness and the usage of toilets to avoid the over–exploitation of cleaners.

Furthermore, the abysmally inadequate and insufficient pay provided to the sanitation workers is a matter of concern. The workers who are spending all their time cleaning up after others use the toilet facilities, are being paid a daily wage of less than Rs500.

All these concerns raise questions about the management of the Maha Kumbh Mela, 2025 and the unabashed disregard towards the violation of human rights of the sanitation workers.

Influencing Media Coverage

In December 2024, the publicity wing of the Uttar Pradesh government, published a letter directing how the reporters and journalists should cover the Maha Kumbh Mela, 2025 while praising the exemplary work done by the ruling government for the organisation of the event.

The festival presents itself as a great opportunity for the journalists to report on the celebrations, however, the U.P. government has made sure to spoon–feed the journalists as to how the festival should be reported and covered in news.

The letter contains 70 detailed themes that the reporters could potentially cover, along with directions to approach the stories and whom to interview for every particular story.

Shishir, the director of the information and public relations department of the Uttar Pradesh government, sent the document to editors in Lucknow, emphasizing the need to focus on the “pre–determined” themes as mentioned in the document.

As reported by The Wire, Shishir stated “As the Mahakumbh draws closer, various related topics of immediate relevance are likely to emerge. Alongside addressing such immediate concerns, our aim is to focus on the predetermined themes as well.” 

This attempt by the government to thwart the journalists and reporters to report the festival based on their own perspectives and perception, and hampering the most fundamental element of the media, its freedom, is alarming.

Impact on Environment and Public Health

Kumbh Mela, which was recognized as an intangible cultural heritage of humanity by the United Nations, Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in 2017, poses significant environmental and health risks that need to be mitigated.

While the World Health Organisation (WHO) has noted that due to increase in seasonal epidemics in respiratory influenza, the acute respiratory infections increase at this time of the year, along with the alert in India over the spread of the Human Metapneumovirus (HMPV), mass gatherings such as Maha Kumbh, may pose serious health risks.

An article published in Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease in 2024, available on the Researchgate website, stated that “The upcoming Kumbh Mela [2025], one of the largest religious gatherings globally, is expected to draw millions of pilgrims across India and beyond. While this event is deeply rooted in tradition and spirituality, it also presents significant public health challenges.”

Further, as per a study published by the Journal of Travel Medicine, it has been indicated that “acute respiratory infections, fever, skin disorders, diarrhoea and other infectious diseases like influenza, gastroenteritis, chickenpox, hepatitis etc can spread more easily during the Kumbh Mela because of the numerous religious events, cramped living quarters, and solid and liquid waste produced throughout the event.”

There have been various outbreaks of diseases and sporadic epidemics at the Kumbh Mela previously as well, such as in 1892, 1948, and in the 1960s, as per a report published by the International Journal of Infectious Diseases. The earliest documented record of such epidemics is the outbreak of Cholera in the year 1817.

It is also to be noted that the Kumbh Mela in 2021 had a huge impact of large gatherings which played a significant factor in the rise of COVID–19 cases.

As reported by LiveMint, Upper Mela Officer Vivek Chaturvedi has mentioned that continuous workshops are being conducted for the doctors and consultants so that they are fully equipped to handle any situation.

Further, the influx of millions of devotees has the potential to severely damage the ecological balance and harm the biodiversity. Fouling of rivers to a large number of bathers harms the aquatic ecosystem. Due to close proximity of a large number of people, the risk of water–borne diseases also drastically increases.

With millions of devotees expected to visit this year’s Maha Kumbh, the health and environmental risks are higher than ever, and would require constant monitoring and extensive efforts by the Government to mitigate the same.

Other issues with the management of Maha Kumbh

While the major challenges posed by the Maha Kumbh have been discussed, there are multiple other instances which reflect inefficient planning and management at the end of the Government.

• Stampede

In Uttar Pradesh’s Jhansi, as the devotees rushed to board a train at the Veerangana Laxmibai Railway Station, panic ensued due to a stampede. Officials reported that as the train was being repositioned, the devotees mistook the train’s movement for repositioning as departure and rushed to board the train, whereby two individuals narrowly escaped being run over by the train as reported by ETV Bharat. This incident that stemmed from a misunderstanding, led to chaos which could have claimed lives of multiple people present there.

This incident reflects the lack of vigilance and proper management of large crowds by the authorities which could have resulted in a tragic accident.

• Fire at the Kumbh Mela

In another incident, the tent city that has been set up by the Government to accommodate the visitors at the Maha Kumbh, became a centre of attention as a tragic fire consumed approximately 180 cottages, 70 to 80 huts, more than 10 tents, and goods worth crores. The fire began as a result of a gas cylinder leak in the Geeta Press Gorakhpur camp’s kitchen. Although there have been no casualties due to the fire, one individual suffered injuries while attempting to escape from the fire as reported by Financial Express. After the incident, the U.P. Government issued a fire safety advisory to all the camps at the Maha Kumbh Mela. The advisory consists of detailed important guidelines to be followed by individuals to avoid any such incidents in the future and for smooth functioning of the Maha Kumbh Mela.

However, it is pertinent to note here that potential of such incidents was not taken into account and the Government is attempting to address every challenge as it props up. Had such advisory and mandatory guidelines been issued beforehand, huge damages could have been prevented and the fire at the Maha Kumbh Mela could have been avoided.

• Use of Technology 

The Government has efficiently employed technology and Artificial Intelligence (AI) for the better management of the Maha Kumbh. The Integrated Command and Control Centre (ICCC) which was originally built for Kumbh Mela – 2019, has been upgraded with latest technology to better manage and monitor the large volume of crowd expected at the festival. “Around 1,650 new CCTV cameras, 24 ANPR cameras, 40 VMCDs, 100 smart parking systems, and AI components for crown management and vehicle counting have been installed for Maha Kumbh, 2025,” as reported by the Times of India.

Crowd management and surveillance systems have been ramped up with AI controlled CCTV cameras. Pilgrims have been given Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) wristbands to ensure their safety and security. Predictive models have been used for better resource management. Internet of Things (IoT) has increased energy efficiency by optimizing electricity usage, enabling sensors in trash cans to notify when they need to be emptied, monitoring water quality of the river, etc. as reported by Boston Institute of Analytics.

With the use of technology and AI for management of Maha Kumbh, it becomes imperative to ask why such revolutionary technologies and methods are not used for crowd management and control in cases of any riots or public unrest? Why is such technology not used for better resource management in cases of natural disasters? The potential benefits of technology are vast and the same must be used by the Government in times of crisis for better management of situations.

Conclusion

The Maha Kumbh, 2025 holds special religious value for the devotees as it is celebrated once every 144 years. The festival promotes spirituality and the religious sentiments in devotees, as millions of people from the World gather to celebrate Maha Kumbh. While this is a remarkable cultural event, it poses various challenges that need to be addressed. The festival is being used by certain individuals to create communal disparity, and harm the social fabric of our society. While the sanitation workers are in a plight as their right to dignity is being violated and they are forced to work in inhumane conditions at less than subpar pay, the journalists and reporters face challenges as the most basic element of media, its freedom is being taken away. Various other instances also reflect the need for better management by the Government of the celebration. For Maha Kumbh to be truly successful, the government must ensure inclusivity, uphold human rights, address environmental and public health concerns, and prioritize effective planning and transparency to make it a celebration that truly honours its spiritual and cultural significance.

The post Unveiling the hidden challenges behind the greatest religious celebration ever: Maha Kumbh, 2025 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

To cap it all now the new date has been thrown up for the real freedom of the country by none other than RSS Sarsanghchalak, Mohan Bhagwat. While addressing in Indore he stated that 22 January 2024 was the day when we got Independence, “the date should be celebrated as “Pratishtha Dwadashi” as the true independence of India, which had faced “parachakra” (enemy attack) for several centuries, was established on this day. The ideals and life values presented by Lord Ram, Krishna, and Shiva are included in the “self of India” and it is not at all that these are the Gods of only those people who worship them, he said.

Bhagwat further said that the invaders destroyed the temples of the country so that the “self” of India also perishes. Projecting Ram Temple Pran Pratishta (Life installation) as the panacea of all our social problems he further added, “I used to ask those people that despite talking about socialism after independence in 1947, giving slogans of ‘Garibi Hatao’ (eradicate poverty) and worrying about people’s livelihood all the time, where did India stand in the 1980s and where have countries like Israel and Japan reached?” The RSS chief said he used to tell these people that “India’s livelihood path goes through the entrance of Ram temple and they should keep this in mind.”

Bhagawat’s constructs are taking the story further and he wants to legitimize the criminal act of demolishing the Babri Mosque. Overarching the diverse cultural and religious traditions he wants to present only Lord Rama as the sole cultural symbol of this country. Even in the broad spectrum of Hinduism there are Lord Shiva, Lord Shrikrishna, Goddess Kali among others. Then we have the glorious traditions of Lord Mahavir, Gautam Buddha, Nanak and Kabir as the part of the great canvass, which India is.

While the population genetics studies clearly show that Aryans were also the migrants, before them there were other natives here. And diverse people coming here can either be seen merely as aggressors walking the path of ways of Kingdoms. Chola Kings ruled in Srilanka, or Alexander tried his best to win over India. Different dynasties and people like Shaka, Hun, Ghulams, Khalji and Mughal rules  were ‘part’ of the subcontinent. This is seen by sectarians as an attack on ‘our’ civilization while those who struggled for Independence of India from the British saw it as an intermixing of historical process; leading to the foundational diversity of the country. Jawaharlal Nehru most aptly describes it as, “some ancient palimpsest on which layer upon layer of thought and reverie had been inscribed, and yet no succeeding layer had completely hidden or erased what had been written previously.”

As per RSS chief the aggressors wanted to demolish our soul by demolishing our temples. The temple destructions in Medieval and late early India were purely for the sake of power and wealth. The earlier attacks and conversions of Jain and Buddha places of worship were due to reaction from Brahminism. To demonize particularly the Muslim rulers, this formulation of temple destructions and many other myths have been propped up. Two examples will suffice while Aurangzeb destroyed nearly 12 temples; he also gave donations to nearly hundred Hindu temples. The eleventh century ruler of Kashmir, Raja Harshdev, appointed a special officer to uproot the idols of Gods and Goddesses, which were made of Gold and Silver or studded with diamonds and rubies.

Bhagwat and his ilk see the country through a narrow Brahminical prism. It was during the colonial period that Indian boundaries emerged. It was the colonial period which was a period of slavery. The previous conquers who ruled settled here and became a part of our national and cultural life. The British ‘Policy of Divide and rule’ planted the notion of earlier rulers being the plunderers and temple destroyers. The previous rulers who ruled did not take away our wealth outside, while the British plunder project led to impoverishment of India. The slavery was imposed by the British and the struggle against them was the freedom movement which culminated in Independence on 15th August 1947, with our Constitution being implemented on 26 January 1950.

Those deviating from this date are the followers of nationalism under the garb of religion, who are uncomfortable with the values of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity of the Constitution which emerged from the freedom struggle.

He needs to introspect what the countries like Japan and Israel achieved through demolishing old holy places and building the one’s of their religion. He also needs to know that after the Ram Temple movement has picked up India’s growth and unity has seen a downward trend. There is a consistent fall in the various indices related to health, nutrition, educational status with increase in poverty levels.

The massive foundations for economic, educational, scientific and industrial prosperity were laid much before the divisive politics of Ram Temple got a boost in the decades of 1980 and 1990s. Bhagwat’s statement totally ignores the massive anti colonial movement. The reason for this is that those who stood for Hindu and Muslim nationalism were not the part of it. In a way his statement is a great insult to all those who sacrificed their live for the freedom of the country from the clutches of colonialism, the period of our slavery.

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

The post When did India Get Independence? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

– A VHP leader addressing a gathering in Delhi.

“..Consume less food, purchase a cheaper mobile phone, anything, only promise to have five tridents in a home”.

– Another VHP leader addressing a meeting in Delhi.

Provocative speeches and distribution of what is being peddled as ‘legally permissible weapons’ , very much in the heart of the national capital ; detailed plans to hold similar events all over the city, on the eve of elections – all this has not stirred the deep slumber in which the law and order machinery found itself in.

Thanks to the inaction, now the campaign to arm a section of radical Hindus has reportedly spread to the womenfolk as well. Plans are afoot to distribute 20,000 daggers to women from the majority community under what is being billed as ‘Shastra Deeksha Samaroh’. In fact, media was agog with footage of daggers being distributed to Hindu women in the second week of January itself.

No doubt, it would be height of innocence to presume that the silence of the officers/ personnel entrusted with maintaining law and order in the city – which is directly under the purview of the Ministry of Home – is inadvertent.

These events are rather difficult to believe in a city still recovering from the ‘riots’ five year ago which saw deaths of innocents from both the communities and damage to their properties, with role of a section of the police itself coming under the scanner.

It is not difficult to imagine the serious impact such radical mobilisation of the majority community can have – with at least 50,000 Hindu men, the actual numbers could be far more, holding fresh tridents/trishuls and 20,000 women possessing daggers – on the social fabric of the city. With Republic Day celebrations approaching followed by elections to the Assembly, with three major players in the wings, it is anybody’s guess that mischievous elements can engage in their dirty tricks, or even a single event/ non-event can bring the peace and harmony in the national capital under cloud.

What needs to borne in mind is that distribution of what are being portrayed as ‘legally permissible weapons’ (the term itself is an oxymoron) – focusing on the majority community – under religious garb have tremendous political overtones and such programmes held in the national capital are no exception.

It remains to be seen how such ‘weapons distribution’ does not come under censure of the Arms Act, 1959. Section 2(1) (c) of the Act defines “arms” as:

Articles of any description designed or adapted as weapons for offences, or defence, and includes firearms, sharp edged and other deadly weapons, and parts of and machinery for manufacturing arms, but does not include articles designed solely for domestic or agricultural uses such as a lathi, or an ordinary walking stick and weapons incapable of being used otherwise than as toys or of being converted into serviceable weapons.

The programme in Paharganj in Delhi in December 2024, where the regular right-wing rhetoric was very much on display, was not an isolated programme. It was an integral part of a ‘series of far-right gatherings in December 2024’ which had exposed a ‘disturbing pattern of communal mobilisation which was spread across Punjab, Delhi and Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan according to the Citizens for Justice & Peace (CJP).

What one observes that even dates of programmes in Delhi, Punjab and Himachal Pradesh coincided with each other (15 December). According to close observers, all these events, “[w]hich involve distributing tridents and administering oaths to “protect Hindu identity,” have become platforms for promoting exclusionary ideologies and inciting communal hatred”, CJP said. All these gathering where vilifying minorities, glorifying ‘baseless conspiracies like ‘love jihad’ and ‘land jihad,’ ‘ calls for calling for economic boycotts’, and glorifying vigilantism is freely on display thus ‘deepen social divisions but also normalize the idea of violence under the guise of cultural or religious defence’, the CJP added.

For example look at this report of a Trishul Deeksha event held in Nurmaha (Punjab), organised by VHP and Bajrang Dal, where ‘[a] far-right leader made several inflammatory remarks, invoking controversial issues tied to communal tensions.’ He declared: “Now that Ram Mandir is built, Kashi and Mathura remain!”—a direct reference to the ongoing demands by right-wing groups to reclaim the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi and the Shahi Idgah mosque in Mathura. Such rhetoric stokes communal sentiments by framing these mosques as illegitimate structures atop Hindu temples.

Any close observer of the communal situation in the country can vouch that the idea of holding ‘Trishul Deeksha Samaroh’ by Hindutva Supremacists formations is not a recent one and has a more than two decade old history, where conscious attempts were made to vitiate communal atmosphere. In fact, while armed communal mobilisation of the wider populace has always remained on the agenda of these supremacists organisations, such attempts gathered further strength through this campaign. The programme of Trishul Deekshas was taken up as a broader campaign since 1998 which gained in pace and stridency since the Gujarat massacre in 2002. Formally such programmes were termed as symbolic religious exercise supposedly to awaken the people but its intent was clear.

Reports of resistance to such mischievous attempts were also not uncommon. According to a report:

Perhaps in this grim situation it would be soothing to remember that a decade ago public protests led by organisations like PUCL, MKSS and others had pressurised the then Gehlot government to not only bring the VHP led Trishul Deeksha programme under the purview of the Arms Act but also prosecute leaders like Togadia who had been making communal hate speeches in the Trishul distribution ceremonies.

With the ascent of these Supremacists forces in the national polity, of late such programmes are again gaining momentum.

Look at this complaint filed by CJP with Nagpur police against two trishul distribution events, organised by Bajrang Dal & VHP. It provided details of these ‘two Trishul Diksha events held on May 2 and May 9’ respectively by ‘extremist outfits owing allegiance to Hindutva’ where, in addition to distribution of tridents amongst men, hate speeches are delivered exhorting Hindus to take up arms.’ Under these programmes demands for ‘India as a Hindu nation were also raised’, and the speakers ‘indulged in peddling various conspiracy theories to generate hate towards Muslims.’ The petition also talked about how “Bajrang Dal (BD) and Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) have been organising such trishul distribution events regularly in the state of Rajasthan, and have been creating disharmony, furthering their communal agenda’.

Within less than three months CJP filed another petition with National Commission of Minorities against ‘arms training camps, weapon distribution events in Assam and Rajasthan’ held on July 30, 2023 and August 1, 2023, flagging “IPC violations, Arms Act breaches, and concerns for public safety and inter-community relations’ in these programmes

According to the complaint, the ‘arms training camp was organised by the Rashtriya Bajrang Dal in Darrang District of the state of Assam’, where ‘around 350 Hindu youths received training in handling firearms, martial arts, survival skills, and quick thinking. The intention of this camp was allegedly to fight against “love jihad” and create a divide among people from different communities, religions, and linguistic affiliations.’ The Rajasthan story was bit different. Here ‘fringe extremist organization of Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal’ allegedly distributed sharp-edged tridents among hundreds of Hindu men in Jaitaran, Pali, Rajasthan. Participants took an oath to uphold a “Hindu Rashtra,” pledging allegiance to militant Hindu ideologies.

Within less than a month Sabrang published a detailed article unmasking ‘the Ideological Shift in Rajasthan’s Communal Landscape’ with a special focus on trident distribution and collective pledges taken at these programmes and explained how it “[r]eflects a troubling trend of religious polarisation, challenging India’s secular fabric and communal harmony. The aggressive mobilisation and hate that inevitably accompanies such gatherings sets the stage of stigmatisation and targeting of minorities in the area.’

According to it, such events which hold deep symbolism within the context of Hindutva, signify not only ‘Commitment to Hindutva Ideology’, but also it is openly proclaimed ‘their allegiance to an ideology that seeks to establish India as a Hindu-only nation’, which ‘goes against the principles of secularism enshrined in the Indian Constitution, that guarantees equal rights and freedoms to all religious communities.’ It further explained how the pledge to protect Hindu Dharam – repeated umpteen times in such gatherings underlines their belief that such elements are under threat from other religious communities and how it ‘fosters an “us versus them” mentality which further leads to ‘social tensions and conflicts.’

Coming back to Delhi, one does not know whether the custodians of law and order in Delhi – who directly work under the central Ministry of Home Affairs, led by none other than Mr Amit Shah, would review their approach and try to rein in these fanatic elements.

An added complexity is the manner in which AAP has never been forthcoming about the politics of polarisation practised by the BJP which is being termed as its own Hindutva Lite politics by analysts.

AAP’s decade old history bears witness to its own game of pandering to the false anxieties of the majority community to try to win them over its own side. A glimpse of its myopic approach vis a vis this issue can be gleaned from its direction to schools to stop admission of ”illegal Bangladeshis’ which contradicts its own policy.

Any neutral observer can see that the task of preserving the secular character of the polity and society becomes extremely difficult and challenging in such times.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Tridents for Men and Daggers for Women appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In its complaint, CJP referenced recent Supreme Court orders, emphasizing the need for immediate preventive actions in line with court rulings, especially to curb hate speech and prevent incitement to violence. The complaint urges the Goa Police to take pre-emptive measures, ensuring public safety and upholding communal harmony.

Urged Goa police to deny permission of the scheduled event

CJP, in its complaint, emphasizes the urgency of taking immediate action and raises concerns over the potential for communal speeches at the HJS’s Goa event. It calls for the cancellation of the event’s permission and states, “We urge you to deny permission for the scheduled January 25, 2025, at 5 PM event in Goa and set an example for the anti-social elements who are attempting to disturb communal peace and harmony. Furthermore, we request the police authorities to remain vigilant and ensure that the rally does not take place if the permission is denied.” 

The poster of the events can be found below:

Supreme Court also appeals for Peace & Harmony

In its complaint, CJP urged the Goa Police to follow strict preventive measures in line with recent Supreme Court directives. CJP pleaded in its complaint that, “In light of the Supreme Court’s recent appeal for peace and harmony in the case concerning the Sambhal Jama Masjid, CJP submit this preventive complaint regarding the “Hindu Rashtra Jagruti Sabha” scheduled for January 25, 2025, in Goa. The Supreme Court, during its hearing on November 29, 2024, urged that “peace and harmony must be maintained” and expressed the desire for no further escalation, following the violence that erupted in Sambhal over a mosque survey. The survey, which was ordered based on claims that the mosque was built on a demolished temple, triggered violent clashes, resulting in the loss of four lives. This tragic event highlights the serious risks of escalating tensions when sensitive issues related to religious sites are addressed in provocative ways.”

Divisive, majoritarian background of the HJS

While highlighting potential danger of provocative and communal speech in scheduled event of January 25, CJP mentioned that the Hindu Janajagruti Samiti (HJS) has previously been associated with communal rhetoric that seeks to inflame tensions between communities. Their previous events have seen controversial statements made by their speakers, which often target religious minorities and promote a divisive agenda.

“Given the organization’s known stance and its association with provocative actions, it is almost certain that the upcoming event will follow a similar pattern, where inflammatory remarks are made with little regard for the consequences” CJP added. 

CJP stated in complaint, the HJS runs a campaign advocating for the passing of anti-Love Jihad laws in across the country. Extremist Right-wing Hindu groups have been using the term “love-Jihad” loosely now, wielded by an aggressive majoritarianism, woven into a dominant caste Hindu narrative of religious extremism, Islamophobia, and communal hatred.

It has also been provided on their website that HJS has been conducting regular workshops to make Hindus “aware” of the consequences of autonomous and free choice marriages, derogatively and provocatively termed ‘Love Jihad.’

CJP’s complaint dated January 22, 2025 may be read here:

Related:

CJP seeks preventive action against Hindu Janjagruti Samiti’s Hyderabad event

CJP files complaint against BJP leader Nazia Elahi Khan over hate speech in Delhi

The post CJP seeks preventive measures ahead of HJS’s “Hindu Rashtra Jagruti Sabha” event in Goa appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Although “Parakram” means valour, in the era of the Sangh Parivar, it has also come to mean aggression against the weak and defenceless.

Subhas was never a “Parakrami” in the sense that the Sangh interprets. He was a true hero who united the weak and oppressed against the mighty British, risking his life in the struggle.

On this day, the Sanghis claiming to be “heirs” to Netaji’s legacy were the ones who diligently served the British army’s efforts to defeat Subhas during World War II. While Subhas was rallying soldiers worldwide against the British, these Hindutvavadis under Savarkar’s leadership,were brokering the recruitment of Hindus into the British army.

Yet, they now praise Netaji with clear ulterior motives.

Firstly, the Sanghis, who have no legacy of participating in the freedom struggle, are attempting to hijack the legacy of all non-Congress or dissident heros who were leaders of different streams  of the freedom struggle, portraying themselves as the heirs to these streams.

Secondly, they exploit the natural and healthy political and ideological differences that existed within the Congress and between Congress and other streams, and around them, they craft a false narrative to claim that all who disagreed with Gandhi and Nehru were pro-Hindutva nationalists, utilizing this for their current Hindutva nation agenda.

This is the real intention of the Sangh Parivar.

With this malicious intent, they have engaged in propaganda backed and filled with lies and fabrications that Gandhi and Nehru conspired against Subhas Chandra Bose and that the Hindutvavadis like Savarkar stood by him, thereby insulting Subhas to a great extent.

To fulfil their ulterior motives, they obscure the political, ideological, and secular perspectives between themselves and Gandhi-Nehru that Subhas had, as well as publicly expressed disdain towards communalists like the Hindu Mahasabha and Muslim League.

At the same time, they conceal the disdain Subhas had for communalists like Savarkar, the Hindu Mahasabha, and the Muslim League.

This article primarily attempts to explain Subhas’s views on secularism, Hindu-Muslim unity, and his opinions about people like Savarkar. It relies mainly on Subhas’s own writings in “An Indian Pilgrim” and “Indian Struggle” and on works by his grandson and scholar Sugata Bose in “His Majesty’s Opponent” and the edited volumes “Collected Works Of Subasha Chandra Bose.”

All these books are available online, and interested parties can read them to understand the political-historical misdeeds of the Sangh Parivar.

Subhas Chandra Bose was not only a prominent leader of Congress but also martyred in the effort to oust the ruling British during World War II by forming the Azad Hind Fauj.

History textbooks have recounted to non-Bengali students anything more than this bare fact.

Subhas was above all else, an exceptional proponent of communal harmony and Hindu-Muslim unity. As a top-notch nationalist, he dreamed of building a future India based on socialist ideals. His views on the history of India, the way he formed the Azad Hind Fauj, and his clear disdain for figures like Savarkar are evident in these respects.

The Tiger of Tipu was the flag of the Azad Hind Fauj!

The Sanghis who attempt day and night to demonise the revered Tipu-Haider as fanatic monsters should be ashamed when considering the respect Subhas Chandra Bose and the Azad Hind Fauj held for them. Subhas used the flying tiger symbol of Tipu as a symbol of anti-British struggle on the first flag of the Azad Hind Fauj. While unveiling the flag, Subhas explained to his soldiers that this flying tiger was a symbol of Tipu Sultan’s resistance against the British.

That is not all. On October 21, 1943, the Azad Hind Fauj declared the provisional government of India. While making this proclamation, the Azad Hind Fauj and Netaji acknowledged several real leaders of the country along with Tipu and Haider, expressing their gratitude. Reading this makes it clear that it is impossible to appropriate Subhas for the RSS agenda.

The proclamation of the Provisional Government of Azad Hind begins like this:

“Ever since Bengal first faced defeat at the hands of the British in 1757, the people of India have continuously waged a struggle against British rule for a hundred years. This period is filled with the unmatched courage and selfless sacrifices shown by the people of India. During this period in the history of India, the names of Sirajuddaula of Bengal, Mohan Lal, Hyder Ali, Tipu Sultan, Velu Thampi….and others are inscribed in golden letters…”

Interested parties can read the full text and see pictures of this proclamation at the following web address:[https://www.roots.gov.sg/Collection-Landing/listing/1278996]

Hindu-Muslim Unity: the foundation of the Azad Hind Fauj

The Modi government is intent on imposing Brahminical Hindi as the sole language of the country. In contrast, the official language of Subhas’s Azad Hind Fauj was Urdu-Hindustani, commonly used by the people of North India, and English was used to be understood by the soldiers from South India. The motto of the Fauj was written in Urdu:

“Itmad (Trust), Ittefaq (Unity), and Qurbani (Sacrifice).”

In 1857, during the First War of Indian Independence, the Indian forces under the leadership of the last Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar called for “Delhi Chalo.” In September 1943, Subhas’s Azad Hind Fauj also embarked from Rangoon (now Myanmar) to expel the British from India, remembering the 1857 uprising, and Subhas called for “Delhi Chalo” during this grand departure.

That is not all either. On September 26, 1943, a special prayer meeting was held by the Azad Hind Fauj near the tomb of Bahadur Shah Zafar.

As described by Subhas’s grandson Sugata Bose in his scholarly work, the proportion of Muslim soldiers in the Azad Fauj was slightly higher than others, and many of Subhas’s closest associates were Muslims. In 1943, during a secret submarine adventure journey, the only companion who travelled with him was Abid Hasan from South Hyderabad. Throughout his travels across Europe and Asia, Hasan was Subhas’s close assistant.

The first division commander of the Azad Hind Fauj was Mohammad Zaman Kiani. The first to hoist the Tricolor flag of India in Imphal, Manipur, was Fauj officer Shaukat Malik. On their tragic last journey, Habibur Rahman perished alongside them. However, this uprising failed, and the soldiers of the Fauj were captured by the British, who charged them with sedition and held a trial. The three Azad Hind Fauj soldiers who were symbolically tried at the Red Fort were:

Prem Sehgal, a Hindu, Shah Nawaz Khan, a Muslim, and Gurbaksh Singh Dhillon, a Sikh.  This also symbolically represented the secular patriotism prevailing in Subhas’s Fauj.

(His Majesty’s Opponent, p. 4)

Netaji’s rejection of the Hindu-Muslim division in Indian history

The Hindutvavadis depict the history of India as having been engulfed in 1200 years of aggression to suit their communal polarisation agenda. Thus, they portray the entire era under Muslim rule before the British and the Muslim rulers before them as a period during which Hindus suffered under Muslim aggressors.

However, Subhas rejected this communal view of Indian history as propagated by the British, aimed at dividing India along Hindu-Muslim lines. He also noted:

“History will bear me out when I say that it is a misnomer to talk of Muslim rule when describing the political order in India prior to the advent of the British. Whether we talk of the Moghul Emperors at Delhi, or of the Muslim Kings of Bengal, we shall find that in either case the administration was run by Hindus and Muslims together, many of the prominent Cabinet Ministers and Generals being Hindus. Further, the consolidation of the Moghul Empire in India was effected with the help of Hindu commanders-in-chief. The Commander-in-chief of Nawab Sirajudowla, whom the British fought at Plassey in 1757 and defeated, was a Hindu, and the rebellion of 1857 against the British, in which Hindus and Moslems were found side by side, was fought under the flag of a Muslim, Bahadur Shah.” (An Indian Pilgrim, p. 15)

Subhas’s outrage against communal organisations like Hindu Mahasabha and Muslim League

During the period of the freedom struggle, Subhas held deep contempt for the Hindu Mahasabha and Muslim League, which were working for the British and causing divisions among the people. When he was elected president of Congress in 1938, he emphasized this issue, saying:

“We often hear talks of a Hindu Raj. This serves no purpose. Can these communal organizations solve the problems faced by India’s working class? Do these organisations have any solution to the issues of unemployment and poverty?” he questioned vehemently.

He also banned members of the Hindu Mahasabha and Muslim League from holding Congress memberships. The reason? Because:

“Jinnah’s idea is to obtain his dream of Pakistan with the help of the British, not to fight jointly with Congress for India’s liberation.”

“On the other hand, Savarkar’s only goal is to collaborate with the British and get military training for Hindus by joining the  British army. After meeting both, I have concluded that nothing can be expected from them for India’s independence.” (The Indian Struggle, p. 344)

Thus, even if one reads Subhas Chandra Bose’s own writings and the scholarly works about him, it becomes clear how malicious the portrayal of Subhas by these fascist Sanghis is.

Beyond the servitude to British colonialism, corporate capitalism, and communal hatred, these fascists have no history of building or fighting for the country. Now, they are hijacking leaders who had differences with Gandhi and Nehru and were non-Congress, and portraying them in a way that insults these leaders, this country, and its history.

A staunchly secular, anti-communal, and socialist nationalist like Subhas Chandra Bose can never be appropriated by the RSS. Nor should he be allowed to be.

The only way to do this is to expose their false narrative through an exposition of real history, which itself must become a movement, right?

(The writer is a political commentator based in Bengaluru)

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia. 

Related:

Debunking “Popular Myths” through a study of Bose

Second killing of Bhagat Singh & Subhash Chandra Bose by the Hindutva Gang

India’s Post Truth Era in ICHR’s Book on Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose

PM Modi to attend Subhas Chandra Bose’s 125th birth anniversary celebrations in Kolkata

The post Can RSS co-opt Subhas Chandra Bose, a staunch secular-socialist and a fond admirer of Tipu Sultan? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On January 20, 2025, Irfan, a 40-year-old resident of Sambhal, was detained by police following a complaint alleging non-repayment of a loan. Within hours of his detention, Irfan passed away. His family alleged that he was denied access to essential medications despite informing the police of his critical condition. They accused the authorities of custodial torture, a claim denied by the police, who asserted that Irfan suffered a heart attack and cited CCTV footage as evidence.

Eyewitnesses, including Irfan’s son, reported that the police ignored repeated pleas to allow Irfan to take his medication. His wife, Reshma, stated that the family had informed the officers of Irfan’s heart condition, yet their concerns were dismissed. This negligence was highlighted as not just an operational lapse but a systemic disregard for detainee rights and basic humanity. Testimonies from neighbours and community members described Irfan as a law-abiding individual whose arrest and subsequent death were deeply shocking for the local population

Medical reports submitted by the family suggested pre-existing cardiac ailments, further calling into question the police’s decision to ignore his health condition. Legal experts pointed out that procedural safeguards under the BNSS (earlier CrPC) and the guidelines issued by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) were blatantly ignored. No medical evaluation was conducted before taking him into custody, a critical violation of NHRC mandates.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by The Quint (@thequint)

The custodial death unfolded in a state notorious for its high incidence of such cases. According to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), Uttar Pradesh leads in custodial fatalities, pointing to systemic lapses in police accountability and adherence to legal procedures.

Outrage and protests

The news of Irfan’s death spread rapidly, sparking widespread public outrage in Sambhal. Hundreds of locals, activists, and political leaders gathered outside the Raisatti police outpost, demanding justice and accountability for what they termed an egregious instance of custodial torture. The protesters carried banners and chanted slogans, urging an independent investigation into the incident. Allegations of inhumane treatment, including the denial of essential medical care, intensified public anger. Eyewitnesses described how the police abandoned the outpost as tensions escalated, leaving it temporarily unmanned. Law enforcement reinforcements, including personnel from the Rapid Action Force, were eventually deployed to manage the situation and restore order.

Political reactions amplified the significance of the protests. Akhilesh Yadav, president of the Samajwadi Party, denounced the custodial death, calling it a “dark stain on the rule of law” under the BJP-led government. He accused the administration of institutionalizing impunity for police excesses. Similarly, Chandra Shekhar Azad, leader of the Bhim Army, pointed to a disturbing trend of custodial deaths disproportionately affecting marginalized communities. He demanded immediate action against the responsible officers and called for systemic police reforms to address such incidents.

Community leaders emphasized that the protests in Sambhal reflected deeper grievances among minority groups, who view custodial deaths as symbolic of institutional bias. Activists highlighted the disproportionately high number of such incidents in Uttar Pradesh, noting that these acts erode trust in law enforcement, especially in minority-dominated areas. The protests became a rallying cry for justice, drawing attention to broader issues of systemic inequities and police misconduct

Judicial commission’s investigation

In response to widespread public pressure and growing national scrutiny, the Uttar Pradesh government established a judicial commission to investigate the custodial death of Irfan and other recent incidents of violence in Sambhal. Headed by retired High Court judge Devendra Arora, the commission visited the region to conduct a thorough inquiry into the events. The investigation aimed to uncover procedural lapses and examine whether Irfan’s fundamental rights were violated during his detention.

The commission undertook multiple tasks, including recording statements from Irfan’s family, community members, and local law enforcement officers. It also reviewed medical evidence, including post-mortem reports, which suggested discrepancies in the police’s official narrative. Reports highlighted a lack of adherence to mandatory procedures, such as the requirement for medical evaluation upon arrest, which is stipulated under the NHRC guidelines and the CrPC (now BNSS).

In addition to investigating Irfan’s case, the commission also expanded its mandate to review broader issues of police conduct in Sambhal. This included an examination of the November 24, 2024, riots, which erupted during a controversial land survey near the Shahi Jama Masjid. Witnesses testified that police inaction and delayed intervention exacerbated communal tensions, leading to widespread violence and property damage. Many residents alleged that the authorities selectively targeted certain communities during the subsequent crackdown..

Systemic concerns and broader implications

The custodial violence in Sambhal is not an isolated incident but a reflection of systemic issues that plague law enforcement across the country. For instance, the case of Somnath Suryavanshi in Parbhani, Maharashtra, on December 15, 2024, mirrors similar patterns. Suryavanshi, a 35-year-old Dalit activist, was arrested following communal violence triggered by the desecration of a replica of the Constitution. While in judicial custody, he complained of chest pain and died shortly thereafter in a state-run hospital. His family alleged police brutality, claiming he was targeted for his Dalit identity and activism. This led to widespread protests, with political leaders, including Rahul Gandhi, asserting that Suryavanshi’s death was a “cent per cent custodial death.” The protests intensified demands for justice and highlighted recurring instances of misuse of power by law enforcement agencies, especially against marginalized communities. These incidents underline the urgent need for systemic reforms to ensure accountability and prevent custodial violence from becoming a normalized aspect of governance

Legal framework governing custodial deaths and torture

The legal implications of custodial torture and deaths in India highlight critical gaps in both legislative enforcement and systemic accountability. Drawing from constitutional mandates, criminal law provisions, and NHRC guidelines, custodial violence remains a grave violation of human rights and judicial directives. Article 21 of the Constitution enshrines the right to life and personal liberty, encompassing protection against inhumane treatment. This is supplemented by Article 22, which provides procedural safeguards during arrest and detention. Yet, these constitutional guarantees are undermined by systemic abuse.

The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, replacing the CrPC, introduces critical procedural safeguards to address such violations. Section 196 mandates a magisterial inquiry in cases involving custodial deaths or rapes, emphasizing the role of judicial or metropolitan magistrates over executive magistrates to ensure impartiality. Section 194 empowers district magistrates to conduct inquests, highlighting the increasing responsibility of civil authorities in ensuring transparent investigations. These provisions align with prior guidelines under Section 176(1A) of the CrPC but aim to bridge enforcement gaps by centralizing accountability within the judicial framework.

NHRC guidelines further reinforce this by mandating independent autopsies, immediate reporting of deaths, and time-bound investigations. However, despite these safeguards, the enforcement remains lacklustre. Data reveals that over five custodial deaths occur daily, underscoring the persistent misuse of authority by law enforcement agencies.

Judicial precedents have consistently emphasized the importance of due process in custodial situations. In D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal 1997 (1) SCC 416, the Supreme Court issued comprehensive guidelines to prevent custodial torture, mandating arrest memos, family notifications, and access to legal representation. Similarly, in Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration 1980 SCC (3) 488, the apex court decried the use of third-degree methods and indiscriminate handcuffing, terming them violative of Articles 21 and 19.

The lack of adherence to these safeguards in cases like Sambhal and Parbhani not only underscores institutional bias but also highlights the urgent need for systemic reforms. It is imperative that police training incorporates a human rights perspective and that civil society acts as a watchdog to bridge enforcement gaps. Furthermore, India’s failure to ratify the UN Convention against Torture reflects a broader reluctance to institutionalize accountability mechanisms at the international level. This reluctance, coupled with the rising trend of custodial violence, demands immediate legislative and administrative intervention to safeguard the dignity and rights of individuals.

Related:

Rising Concerns as Incidents of Custodial Deaths of Dalits and Muslims Continue Unabated

Custodial deaths highest in Gujarat over 5 years; jails overcrowded

A Muslim man in Hyderabad detained on suspicion of theft reportedly subjected to custodial torture for 5 days

The post Sambhal Custodial Death: A systemic failure exposed appeared first on SabrangIndia.