The investigation, released on August 26, draws on witness testimony as well as video and photographic material examined and verified by Amnesty International’s Evidence Lab. According to the organisation, its findings show the use of pellet-firing shotguns, tear gas launchers and grenades, batons, electric shock devices and firearms against protesters between July 20 and July 24 in Delhi and Siwan, Bihar. Amnesty says the manner in which these weapons were deployed breached international human rights standards as well as domestic policing guidelines.

The findings directly challenge the Delhi Police’s public account of the crackdown. Delhi Police had denied allegations of disproportionate force and described its handling of the protest as “professional”, including before the Supreme Court. Amnesty, however, says the evidence it verified contradicts that version of events.

For Amnesty International India Chair Aakar Patel, the episode represents something more serious than a conventional crowd-control operation. He described the authorities’ response as beginning with restrictions on communication, movement and assembly before escalating into what he called unnecessary or excessive force against peaceful protesters, including children. The organisation has characterised the response as “state-sanctioned violence masked as crowd control” and has pointed to the absence of accountability a month later as evidence of continuing impunity.

Evidence of pellet firing

One of the most serious findings concerns the use of shotguns capable of firing pellet ammunition. Amnesty’s Evidence Lab verified 17 videos filmed in central Delhi on July 20, covering areas around Jantar Mantar, Sansad Marg and Connaught Place, as well as two videos from Siwan in Bihar recorded on July 24. The Delhi footage was found to show personnel belonging to the Delhi Police, Rapid Action Force (RAF) and Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF).

Two videos verified by Amnesty show an RAF officer firing a shotgun into a crowd at the Connaught Place–Sansad Marg intersection. Two other verified videos show protesters near the same location with injuries consistent with birdshot wounds. Amnesty also verified CCTV footage showing two RAF officers carrying shotguns elsewhere in the area.

The significance of the finding lies in the nature of the ammunition. Birdshot consists of multiple small metal pellets and is inherently inaccurate, Amnesty says, creating a serious risk not only to the intended target but also to bystanders. The organisation states that birdshot has been associated with deaths and blindness in other contexts and argues that it has no legitimate place in law enforcement.

A protester interviewed by Amnesty described being struck from behind while attempting to flee. According to the testimony, the individual sustained approximately 25 to 30 pellet wounds and required hospital treatment. The protester said doctors confirmed that the injuries were caused by pellets and that the incident had left extensive scarring.

The alleged absence of a warning is also significant. India’s Bureau for Police Research and Development guidelines recommend that security forces warn protesters before deploying less-lethal or lethal force. International standards similarly require law-enforcement agencies to exhaust non-violent means wherever possible and issue a clear warning before resorting to force when circumstances permit. Amnesty says the protester it interviewed reported receiving no warning before the pellet firing.

The allegations had previously been rejected by Delhi Police, which described reports of pellet injuries as “Fake News” and called them “completely false and misleading”. The police also warned that legal action could be taken against those allegedly spreading rumours.

However, the Amnesty investigation comes alongside other reporting cited in the organisation’s findings. The Hindu reported that an RAF unit fired two ballistic cartridges loaded with plastic pellets on the evening of July 20 on the orders of a Deputy Commissioner of Police. An internal CRPF inquiry reportedly found that RAF personnel had fired at least seven rounds containing metal pellets. An RTI response cited by The Hindu indicated that at least ten people were injured by pellets during the protests.

Tear gas used against protesters

Amnesty’s investigation also raises concerns about how tear gas was deployed. One verified video shows a tear gas grenade landing close to a group of protesters and exploding with a heavy blast. Amnesty says another verified sequence showed the grenade exploding immediately after landing near protesters, with one person attempting to escape before being thrown to the ground.

Eyewitnesses told Amnesty that tear gas grenades were fired directly towards protesters rather than being launched at an angle above their heads. The organisation says this is inconsistent with UN guidance on less-lethal weapons. More fundamentally, Amnesty argues that the use of tear gas should be restricted to situations involving widespread and serious violence. While acknowledging that there were isolated incidents of protesters throwing stones, it says the available evidence does not indicate violence on a scale that would meet that threshold.

This distinction is crucial. Crowd-control powers are not unlimited simply because a protest becomes difficult to manage. The question is whether the force used is necessary and proportionate to the threat actually posed. Amnesty’s findings suggest that, in several instances, the authorities crossed that line.

Lathis, including against peaceful protesters

The investigation further documents what Amnesty describes as frequent misuse of long, flexible batons, or lathis. The organisation verified eight videos showing Delhi Police and RAF personnel striking protesters, including a young boy who, according to Amnesty, offered no provocation or resistance. In some instances, officers allegedly struck people indiscriminately across different parts of their bodies. One verified video shows a man who had been knocked to the ground being repeatedly struck while he was unable to move or pose an apparent threat.

Amnesty notes that the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture has described such long flexible batons as inherently cruel, inhuman or degrading because they can deliver greater kinetic force than conventional batons, increasing the risk of serious injury. The investigation also identifies another accountability concern: the presence of plain-clothes men participating in beatings.

In at least two verified videos, men in plain clothes—including some wearing black helmets marked “Delhi Police”—are seen beating protesters with lathis. Uniformed officers appear to escort them towards the crowd but do not intervene, according to Amnesty. The organisation also points to the apparent absence of visible identification such as name tags or badge numbers, which it says violates the principle that law-enforcement officials must be identifiable during encounters involving the use of force.

Electric shock weapons under scrutiny

Amnesty also verified a video showing an RAF officer using an electric shock baton against a peaceful protester. The organisation argues that direct-contact electric shock devices cause severe pain without necessarily incapacitating a person and that there are less harmful alternatives available to law enforcement. Amnesty, together with the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, has called for their complete prohibition because of the risks of severe suffering, psychological harm, lasting disability and, in cases of prolonged use, death.

The finding therefore adds another layer to the concerns raised by the report: the issue is not simply the quantity of force used, but the choice of weapons and methods deployed against people participating in an assembly.

An assault rifle in Siwan

Perhaps the most alarming footage examined by Amnesty comes not from Delhi but from Siwan, Bihar. Two videos filmed on July 24 and verified by Amnesty show a state police officer firing an AK-type assault rifle towards protesters. Amnesty notes that such firearms are designed to kill and, under international standards governing assemblies, may only be used where there is an imminent threat of death or serious injury to a specific individual and only as an absolute last resort. The organisation says it found no evidence that such a threat existed in the incident examined.

The report says authorities have made no public commitment to investigate or prosecute officers involved in the alleged use of firearms, birdshot, tear gas, lathis and electric shock weapons. Amnesty is calling for a prompt, impartial and effective investigation, with the findings made public. It has specifically demanded an immediate end to the deployment of birdshot ammunition and direct-contact electric shock devices.

The crackdown began before the first baton was raised

The Amnesty investigation also places the use of force within the wider restrictions imposed on the “Chalo Sansad” march. Authorities denied permission for the march, imposed an internet shutdown around the proposed protest areas, prohibited gatherings of more than five people, closed several Delhi Metro stations and erected barricades across central Delhi.

Amnesty argues that these measures themselves raise serious freedom-of-assembly concerns. Under international human rights law, peaceful assemblies are not supposed to depend on prior permission. Where notification requirements exist, their purpose should be to allow authorities to facilitate an assembly rather than provide a mechanism for restricting it. The organisation further argues that the prohibitory orders effectively amounted to a blanket ban on the march and failed the requirements of legality, necessity and proportionality. It reaches a similar conclusion regarding the blanket internet shutdown imposed around the protest.

This is an important aspect of Amnesty’s findings. The report does not examine the July 20 violence simply as an isolated confrontation between protesters and police. It places the physical use of force within a broader sequence of restrictions—communication blackouts, movement restrictions, barricading, transport disruption and prohibitory orders—that had already narrowed the space for protest.

More than 400 injured

The scale of the confrontation was substantial. According to Delhi Police, more than 400 people, including police personnel and protesters, were injured. Amnesty also notes that at least three people were injured in Siwan, including a bystander who was shot and sustained a bullet wound to the neck. The report’s findings therefore raise questions extending beyond individual incidents captured on camera. If hundreds were injured during the police response, and if independently verified footage shows the deployment of weapons in circumstances Amnesty considers unlawful, the central question becomes one of institutional accountability: who authorised the force, who carried it out, who monitored it, and who is responsible for investigating it? A month after the events, Amnesty says there has been no public commitment from the authorities to investigate or prosecute officers involved.

Amnesty places the July events against the longer history of pellet-gun use by Indian authorities. The organisation has previously documented extensive injuries, including blindness and deaths, linked to the use of birdshot-loaded shotguns for crowd control in Jammu and Kashmir. A committee established by the Ministry of Home Affairs in 2016 to consider alternatives recommended restricting the use of such weapons to the “rarest of rare cases”, although it did not recommend a complete prohibition.

In 2018, the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights called on India to end the use of pellet-firing shotguns for crowd control in Jammu and Kashmir. A petition seeking to decommission the use of pellet-firing shotguns by law-enforcement agencies for policing assemblies was also filed before the Supreme Court in July 2026. The Delhi allegations therefore revive a longstanding question about whether weapons that have caused severe and sometimes permanent injuries in crowd-control situations should be used at all.

From “crowd control” to accountability

The central thrust of Amnesty International’s investigation is ultimately about the limits of state power. The State unquestionably has a responsibility to protect people, maintain public order and respond to violence. But policing a protest does not give authorities an unrestricted licence to use force. International standards require force to be lawful, necessary and proportionate, with lethal force reserved for exceptional circumstances involving an imminent threat to life or serious injury.

Amnesty’s evidence raises questions on each of those fronts. Its investigation alleges pellet firing into crowds, tear gas deployed directly at protesters, repeated baton strikes against people who were not resisting, the use of an electric shock device against a peaceful protester and the firing of an assault rifle in Siwan. It also documents restrictions on communication and assembly before and during the protest.

The significance of the report lies not merely in its catalogue of weapons. It is the combination of restriction, force and apparent absence of accountability that makes the findings particularly troubling. The Delhi Police has maintained that its handling of the protest was professional. Amnesty’s investigation reaches a sharply different conclusion, backed by 19 videos it says its Evidence Lab verified across Delhi and Siwan, alongside witness testimony and photographic evidence.

The complete report may be viewed here.

Related:

From the violence of 2024 to the Bakri Eid tensions of 2026, a fact-finding report examines Mira Road’s deepening communal fault lines

Bihar: Not just Delhi, Patna, Siwan too saw brute police violence against demonstrating students: PUCL

Inside the SSP’s Office: Allegations of beatings, torture & police impunity against farmer leaders in Meerut, UP

‘Wherever You Go, We are watching’: Second threat letter to Kashmiri Pandits

The post Amnesty Investigation finds unlawful and deadly force against CJP-led protesters in Delhi and Siwan appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In its report released Tuesday, August 25 in Geneva, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) has, first and foremost, criticised the implementation of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam, and raised concerns about the subjecting of Bengali-speaking Muslims to “systematic and structural racial discrimination”.

The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has published findings on India first time after 2007, after 19 years, and urged the Indian government to address discrimination, hate crimes: this UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) evaluates every country on the basis of its implementation, or not, of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

The CERD Committee has therefore called for the suspension of the NRC and urged New Delhi to review its legislative framework, and “urgently address discrimination, hate speech, and hate crimes against Rohingya, Bengali-speaking Muslims, migrants, and asylum-seekers”.

Interestingly, the Election Commission of India’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) process was also called out in the observations, with the committee raising concern that Bengali-speaking Muslim voters were reportedly disproportionately impacted in West Bengal and Assam.

The “concluding observations” on the combined twentieth and twenty-first periodic reports of India raised wide-ranging concerns over caste discrimination, attacks on minorities, shrinking civic space, racial profiling, the treatment of migrants and the implementation of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in India.

“The Committee was gravely concerned about reports of large-scale violations perpetrated by law enforcement officials against ethnic and ethno-religious groups, Indigenous and Tribal Peoples, including Scheduled Tribes, Scheduled Castes, particularly Dalits, and non-citizens,” the press release has stated.

“These included racially motivated violence, excessive use of force, extrajudicial killings, arbitrary and prolonged detention without due process, torture, ill-treatment and sexual violence.”

The Committee called on India to conduct prompt, thorough and impartial investigations into all such allegations and ensure accountability for those responsible.

Hence, the UN’s CERD Committee has called upon the Indian government to urgently address discrimination, hate speech and hate crimes against Rohingya, Bengali-speaking Muslims, migrants and asylum-seekers.

The Committee urged the State Party to protect their rights, refrain from collective expulsions and ensure access to international protection in line with the principle of non-refoulement.

The Committee welcomed the submissions of the State Party and constructive dialogue that took place earlier this month on August 11 and 12 with Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General of India, leading the high-level delegation.

Despite this pushback from the Indian government, during the session, Stamatia Stavrinaki, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said independent monitoring recorded over 1,300 anti-Muslim hate-speech incidents in 2025, including recurring rhetoric attributed to senior officials.

The delegation responded that legislation from 2023 criminalised acts amounting to hate speech and hate crimes. When offences were conducted against Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, additional protections applied.  Freedom of religion was a constitutional guarantee in India, the delegation added.

In the concluding observations, the Committee also highlighted the increase in law enforcement operations targeting Rohingya, Bengali-speaking Muslims, migrants and asylum-seekers, particularly following the 2017 Home Affairs order and the April 2025 Pahalgam attack in Kashmir.

The Committee noted that the statistics provided by the State Party on scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, and refugees are based on the results of the 2011 population census. It also notes the information provided by the delegation about the launch of the census in April 2026, after a five-year delay, which will collect data on caste and incorporate the principle of self-identification.

The CERD Committee remained concerned about the lack of disaggregated data on Indigenous / Tribal Peoples, ethnic and ethno-religious groups and non-citizens, such as migrants, refugees, asylum-seekers and stateless persons.

The Committee is also concerned that Bengali-speaking Muslims are categorised as “non-original inhabitants”, while noting the absence of a clear definition of this category in the legislative framework, and are reportedly subjected to more rigorous standards compared to other categories in relation to the verification process of the National Register of Citizens.

The entire report released on August 25 may be read here.

Related:

Int’l Day to Combat Islamophobia: UN Chief’s Remarks | United Nations

Hate crimes: Report documents 602 hate crimes, 345 hate speech incidents in 1st year of Modi’s third term

As the date for the general assembly election approaches, hate crimes in India continue

The post Address Discrimination & Hate Crimes India told: CERD, UN appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Bhati, president of the Bharatiya Kisan Union (BR Ambedkar faction), has alleged that he was beaten with shoes, fists, kicks, belts and wooden sticks, while Jatav, the organisation’s Meerut district president, allegedly suffered similar treatment. Bhati was left with a heavily swollen eye and other visible injuries, as reported by The Wire.

A meeting with the SSP that allegedly turned into an assault

According to Bhati’s account, he and Jatav went to meet then-SSP Avinash Pandey on August 19. They were seeking relief in a case arising from protests held on July 8 over the murder of Lalita Gautam, a young Dalit woman from Meerut. Bhati has maintained that he was not present at the protest and wanted his name removed from the FIR connected with the demonstration. He said the two men had been trying to meet the SSP for several days and were eventually asked to come to his office.

Bhati alleged that the conversation quickly became hostile, with Pandey abusing him and questioning his credentials as a political and farmer leader. He said that when he objected to the alleged abuse, police personnel dragged him into another room. There, he alleged, the SSP assaulted him. Bhati has described being kicked, punched and beaten with shoes and a belt. He specifically alleged that Pandey kicked him around the eye several times after he fell to the floor.

The Indian Express, which spoke to Bhati, reported his allegation that he was assaulted for an extended period before he and Jatav were taken to the SOG office. Bhati also alleged that wooden planks and sticks were used against them and that the soles of their feet, backs and waist were beaten.

His visible injuries have become a central element of the controversy. Photographs showed substantial swelling around his eye, while videos released by Bhati showed him describing the alleged assault.

“मेरठ SSP के दफ्तर में किसी बात पर वाद विवाद हुआ। बात खराब हो गई, हिंसा का प्रयोग हुआ। सहारनपुर रेंज DIG से इस पूरे केस की जांच कराई जा रही है”

मेरठ में किसान नेता दिग्विजय भाटी की बर्बरता से पिटाई पर ADG भानु भास्कर ने कहा !! https://t.co/SCjEgECz3g pic.twitter.com/xeiUsdPHXc

— Sachin Gupta (@Sachingupta) August 21, 2026

Meerut police claims Samajwadi Party leader Digvijay Singh Bhati sustained the torture injuries after he fell from his scooty while returning from police office. https://t.co/7otICjnVLZ pic.twitter.com/e0TecnoXtc

— Piyush Rai (@Benarasiyaa) August 21, 2026

SSP kicked me in the eye multiple times, says Samajwadi party leader tortured in custody

Samajwadi party leader Digvijay Bhati claims he was brutally assaulted by Meerut SSP Avinash Pandey over Bhati’s involvement in a protest over murder of a Dalit girl. Later, he was taken to… pic.twitter.com/75JspJ8P09

— Piyush Rai (@Benarasiyaa) August 21, 2026

Spoke to Digvijay Bhati, who according to UP’s Meerut police, fell from a scooty while returning from police office. pic.twitter.com/tHyUhpEkmQ

— Piyush Rai (@Benarasiyaa) August 21, 2026

From the SSP office to the SOG office

Bhati has alleged that the incident did not end inside the SSP’s office. According to his account, the two men were subsequently taken by SOG personnel to another location. There, he alleged, their hands and legs were tied and they were beaten repeatedly with sticks and belts. He has described being punched around the head and temple and suffering repeated assaults. He further alleged that the men were denied ordinary dignity during the episode, including being given water in the cap of a bottle.

Perhaps the most disturbing allegation concerns their alleged humiliation after the physical assault. Bhati has alleged that police personnel played the Hindi film song “Choli Ke Peeche Kya Hai” and forced the two men to dance despite their physical condition. India Today reported the allegation that the two were forced to dance to the song, while The Indian Express also reported Bhati’s account of being humiliated after allegedly being beaten at the SOG office.

Jatav, meanwhile, has alleged that he was threatened with an encounter. Bhati has also claimed that the police threatened them with further consequences if they spoke about what had allegedly happened.

The police initially offered a dramatically different version

Meerut police initially rejected the allegations as “false and baseless”. According to the police version reported by The Wire, Bhati and Jatav had visited the police office in connection with an earlier FIR. The police claimed that the two subsequently fell from their scooter while returning home, sustaining the injuries visible in photographs. The police further said that the two men themselves submitted a written application concerning the incident, which was entered in the general diary at Civil Lines police station.

The controversy intensified when Avinash Pandey was transferred from his position as Meerut SSP on August 20 and attached to the DGP headquarters in Lucknow. Pandey was among nine IPS officers transferred in the reshuffle. Unlike officers who were given new district postings, he was attached to the state headquarters. Times of India reported that the transfer came amid the allegations of illegal detention and custodial torture.

The following day, Additional Director General of Police, Meerut Zone, Bhanu Bhaskar announced an inquiry. Saharanpur Range DIG Abhishek Singh was tasked with investigating the allegations and submitting a report. The police leadership initially described the incident more cautiously, saying that a dispute had arisen at the SSP’s office on August 19, after which violence allegedly took place. The case was therefore no longer simply an allegation made by two activists. It had become an official police inquiry.

Eight policemen sent to the lines; inspector suspended

The administration subsequently took further action. After taking charge, new Meerut SSP BBGTS Murthy ordered eight police personnel to be sent to the police lines, including Civil Lines SHO Akhilesh Gaur, two sub-inspectors and five constables. On August 23, Gaur was suspended. Times of India reported that the suspension was ordered on grounds including alleged negligence, apathy and arbitrary conduct in the discharge of his duties.

By August 25, reports indicated that Gaur had been suspended while the other personnel remained subject to administrative action, with the inquiry continuing. The investigating team has also begun examining the physical locations and documentary evidence. Navbharat Times reported that DIG Abhishek Singh inspected the relevant locations and examined CCTV footage and duty records, while questioning personnel connected with the allegations.

This controversy did not begin on August 19

The allegations against the police must also be viewed against the backdrop of what happened in Meerut in July. The entire chain of events goes back to the killing of Lalita Gautam, a 20-year-old Dalit student whose body was recovered in May after she went missing. Her death generated anger among Dalit groups and local residents, who questioned the police investigation and demanded that additional people allegedly connected with the crime be arrested.

On July 8, protesters gathered in Meerut demanding justice. The protest subsequently escalated, with police using force to disperse the demonstrators. Times of India reported that nearly 100 members of the Dalit community had gathered and that the confrontation escalated after protesters blocked roads and demanded that senior officials personally hear their grievances. A video from the confrontation also showed then-SSP Avinash Pandey repeatedly slapping a protester inside a police vehicle.

VIDEO: Meerut SSP Enters Police Van, Slaps Protest Detainee

Meerut SSP Avinash Pandey was seen entering a police custody vehicle and slapping a detainee during action taken after the Dalit community protest.

According to police, the detainee has been identified as Ravi Gautam,… pic.twitter.com/FLHa02gYSk

— Atulkrishan (@iAtulKrishan1) July 8, 2026

The police subsequently registered cases against protesters. According to Times of India, 13 people were named and around 50 others were booked on serious charges, including attempt to murder and allegations concerning women police personnel. Seven people were arrested and sent to judicial custody.

Those proceedings subsequently changed. On July 21, Times of India reported that serious non-bailable charges against the protesters had been dropped, following developments surrounding the case and intervention by the courts.

The July crackdown had also attracted the attention of the National Human Rights Commission. The NHRC sought an action-taken report from the Uttar Pradesh DGP and Home Secretary after a complaint alleged that Meerut police had used excessive force against protesters and caused serious injuries, reported The Hindu. Times of India reported that the Commission sought a detailed report within 15 days.

The ‘history-sheeter’ argument cannot answer allegations of torture

One of the most revealing aspects of the police response has been its emphasis on Bhati and Jatav’s criminal cases. Police have said that Bhati has several cases registered against him and that Jatav also has multiple cases. Bhati has disputed the circumstances and nature of several of these cases, saying many relate to protests and allegations arising from political activity. But even assuming every case cited by the police is genuine and pending, that does not resolve the central allegation. A criminal record, or a history sheet, does not authorise custodial violence.

Related:

Bihar: Not just Delhi, Patna, Siwan too saw brute police violence against demonstrating students: PUCL

The State Wants the Delete Button: India’s new architecture of digital censorship

When Suspicion Becomes Deportation: The case of Sahida Fakir and the dangerous criminalisation of Bengali identity

Supreme Court: UP Gangsters Act ‘stillborn’ for prescribing punishment without creating an offence

‘Wherever You Go, We are watching’: Second threat letter to Kashmiri Pandits

The post Inside the SSP’s Office: Allegations of beatings, torture & police impunity against farmer leaders in Meerut, UP appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The revised schedule was issued by the Election Commission in an order dated August 19, following a request from the Chief Electoral Officer of Maharashtra.

Under the revised programme, the draft electoral roll will be published on August 31. Voters will then have one month, up to September 30, to submit claims and objections.

The final electoral roll, which was earlier scheduled to be published on October 7, will now be released on November 4.

Claims and objections period extended

The revised schedule provides for the filing of claims and objections from August 31 to September 30. The notice and disposal of claims and objections will continue until October 29.

Under the earlier schedule, the draft roll was to be published on August 5, with claims and objections accepted until September 4. The notice and disposal process was scheduled to continue from August 5 to October 3. The changes therefore extend the overall timeline for scrutiny of the draft electoral roll and disposal of claims and objections before the final list is prepared.

Polling station rationalisation by August 24

The Election Commission has also revised the timeline for rationalisation and rearrangement of polling stations. The exercise, which was earlier scheduled to be completed by July 29, is now to be completed by August 24.

The revised programme also directs election officials to communicate the changes to all concerned officers and to publicise the revised schedule through available means. Political parties are also required to be informed about the changes in writing.

Enumeration process concluded on August 17

The house-to-house enumeration exercise in Maharashtra has already concluded. Booth Level Officers (BLOs) visited electors and collected filled and signed Enumeration Forms as part of the SIR process.

According to information released by the Chief Electoral Officer, Maharashtra has around 9.78 crore electors. Of these, 7.71 crore electors, or 78.85 per cent, submitted their filled and signed Enumeration Forms during the house-to-house exercise conducted between June 30 and August 17. The remaining 2.07 crore electors have been categorised as “Uncollectable EF” under the prescribed norms and based on the factual status recorded during the exercise.

Original schedule began in June

The original SIR programme provided for preparation, training and printing between June 20 and June 29. This was followed by house-to-house visits by BLOs from June 30 to July 29. The house-to-house enumeration period was subsequently extended, and the collection of Enumeration Forms ultimately concluded on August 17.

The Election Commission has now revised the subsequent stages of the exercise, including publication of the draft roll, the claims and objections period, disposal of objections and publication of the final electoral roll.

October 1 qualifying date

The SIR in Maharashtra is being conducted with October 1, 2026, as the qualifying date.

The revised schedule will govern the remaining stages of the electoral roll revision, beginning with publication of the draft roll on August 31. Claims and objections will then be considered before the final electoral roll is published on November 4.

Related:

Maharashtra SIR: 2.08 crore (20.8 million) voter forms “uncollected” hence may not be listed in August 24 draft electoral roll

SIR 2025-26: Dismantling the very Idea of India?

21 Opposition parties to CJI: SIR process is irregular and illegal, must be suspended

SIR and the Making of a Stateless Citizen? | R. Rajagopal Speaks Out | Teesta Setalvad

Karnataka launches SIR with 5.5 crore voters, State Govt voices transparency concerns

The post ECI revises Maharashtra SIR schedule, final voter list to be published on November 4 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Ram Puniyani as he is known, has crisscrossed the country holding training workshops on communal harmony, the historical growth of Hindu communalism etc. He is currently the chairperson of the Centre for Study of Society and Secularism (CSSS) founded by the late, Dr Asghar Ali Engineer.

The far Hindu right’s tortured bid to appropriate Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar, the architect of India’s constitution evolved into a book by Puniyani, first exclusively featured on Sabrangindia on the eve of Constitution Day (November 26, 2016) on November 18 that year. The book, Ambedkar, Hindutva and RSS has been widely used by activists especially in Maharashtra. The excerpt may be read here. Another article by him exposing the hypocrisy and authoritarianism behind the Hindu right’s obsessive vegetarianism may be read here. In this article, apart from other historically significant details, Puniyani points out that Hitler who unleashed the biggest ever pogroms in history of modern times was a vegetarian! Significantly, Puniyani drew the connection in the anti-Buddhist (pro Brahmanism) stance of the supremacist Hindu right in their attempts to denigrate Emperor Asoka in this article that may be read here.

In March 2019, Dr Ram Puniyani was the subject of threats to his life from right wing goons; this too was exclusively covered by us at Sabrangindia and may be referred to here. Ram Puniyani had then written to the then Mumbai Police Commissioner about receiving threats and even met the Mumbai Jt CP with a delegation of other citizens. Reports may be read here and here. He was then granted round the clock protection.

A brief bibliography of his pamphlets and books, as medical professional and secular activist doyen (sourced from Wikipedia) is impressive:

• Clinical Hemorheology: New Horizons(New Age International, 1996), Applied Clinical Hemorheology (with Hideyuki Nimi, Quest Publications, 1998)
• The Other Cheek: Minorities under Threat(Media House, 2000), Second Assassination of Gandhi (University of Leicester, 2002),
• Communalism: What is False: What is True(with Khalid Azam, Bombay Sarvoda Friendship Center, 2002)
• Communal Politics: Facts Versus Myths(2003)
• Communalism: Illustrated Primer(Safdar Hashmi Memorial Trust and J&P Publications, 2004)
• Hindu Extreme Right-Wing Groups : Ideology and Consequences(Media House, 2004)
• Fascism of Sangh Parivar(Media House, 2004)
• Religion, Power and Violence: Expression Of Politics In Contemporary Times, (SAGE, 2005)
• Contours of Hindu Rashtra: Hindutva, Sangh Parivar And Contemporary Politics(Kalpaz, 2006)
• Indian Democracy, Pluralism and Minorities(Global Media, 2006)
• The Politics behind Anti-Christian Violence(compilation of investigation committee reports, Media House, 2006) Terrorism: Facts versus Myths (Pharos Media, 2007)

Several secular national parties have conducted workshops conducted by Dr Ram Puniyani. As stated by the CSSS today on the occasion of Dr Puniyani turning 81:

“Dr. Ram Puniyani’s strength was that developing a deep understanding about the root causes of communal conflict and violence, he could explain it even to the grassroot activists in a language and manner they could easily understand. His central point would be that what appears superficially as violence between the followers of two religions has deeper roots and causes. Communal identities and conflicts appeared in India during colonial period and as a result of colonial exploitation of India and their divide and rule policy. India was transitioning from feudalism to introduction of capitalist mode of production controlled by the colonial power. Religion based communal identities emerged as a result, and were encouraged by the British rulers. The communal elite supported the British rulers and sought their patronage for a greater share vis-à-vis the rival community. This struggle for greater share within the colonial governance framework resulted in deepening communal identities and in violent conflicts. To simplify this complex process, while addressing workshops, Dr. Ram Puniyani would enact with his word power the feudal rulers and their culture, the transition to colonial rule by his typical “rail, mail and jail” allegory. He argued that the feudal classes, which were being increasingly weakened due to introduction of capitalist mode of production by the colonial rulers resorted to communal identity politics. He used humour and constantly engaged the participants of the workshop in a conversational mode. The participants would return with an enriched understanding of the root causes of communalism and communal nationalism. He would end his two-day presentation with the shared and composite culture of India and shared secular nationalism. The rise of Sangh Parivar’s fascist ideology was just not against the minorities, but also against all the socially and economically marginalised communities, viz. the Dalits, women, the working class, and the farmers.”

Dr Puniyani is the recipient pf several prestigious awards – Indira Gandhi Award for national integration, the Communal Harmony Award, which is awarded by National Communal Harmony Foundation under the Ministry of Home Affairs, Mukundan Menon Award for Journalism, just to name a few.

SabrangIndia and Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) take the opportunity of his 81^st birthday to wish only more such dedicated proselytising from the gentle Dr Ram Puniyani.

–Editors

Related:

Nationalism | Religion | Hate | Violence | History : Ram Puniyani with Teesta Setalvad

The post Ram Puniyani at 81: A teacher of secularism, an everyday passion appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It would be a sad day for the city of New York that an organisation, which is vehemently opposed to democracy, humanism, egalitarianism, multi-culturalism, equality within Hinduism, and world peace, is allowed unquestioned narration. The RSS remains a ‘threat’ to world peace and this is vouched for not just by its critics but also by its own official records.

Of multiple documents, only the author in three parts is sharing a few crucial facts from the RSS’ own archives and records of activities.

1. ANTI-HUMANITY
2. ANTI-HINDU
3. ANTI DEMOCRATIC-SECULAR INDIA

ANTI-HUMANITY

RSS’ design of Hindus ruling the world

This supremacist organization has been working overtime to establish hegemony of ‘Hindus’ over the world. Its two most important theorists, VD Savarkar (1883-1966) and MS Golwalkar (1906-1973) whom RSS follows religiously chalked out this design in the first half of 20^th century itself.  Savarkar ended his bigoted work ‘Hindutva’ (1923) with the following warning:

“22 crores of people [population of India at that time], with India for their basis of operation, for their Fatherland and for their Holyland with such a history behind them, bound together by ties of common blood and common culture, can dictate their terms to the whole world. A day will come when mankind will have to face the force.”

[Savarkar, V.D., Hindutva, VK Kelkar, Poona, 1923, p. 128]

Golwalkar under whom hundreds of thousands of cadres have been groomed rephrased the same warning on behalf of Hindus to the world in his controversial book ‘We or Our Nation Hood Defined” (1939) in the following words:

“The Race Spirit has been awakening. The lion was not dead, only sleeping. He is rousing himself up again and the world has to see the might of the regenerated Hindu nation strike down the enemy’s hosts with its mighty arm. The star has risen and is steadily climbing up the firmament. At no distant date the world shall see it and tremble with fear or dance with delight…And Race Spirit calls, National consciousness blazes forth and we Hindus rally to the Hindu Standard, the Bhagwa Dhwaja [saffron flag], set our teeth in grim determination to wipe out the opposing forces.”

[Golwalkar, MS, We or Our Nationhood Defines, Bharat Publications, Nagpur, 1939, pp. 12-13][1]                                                                                                                             

Indian Diaspora divided on communal basis

Shockingly, Bhagwat shall be preaching ‘Universal Oneness’ despite causing dangerous fracture amongst the Indian diaspora which includes Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims, Jains, Buddhists, Parsis, Animists and those who do not believe in any religion. Its international wing is named as ‘Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh’ thus having no regard for people of Indian origin who are not Hindus. This anti-India attitude has given rise to deep religious divisions within the ranks of Indian diaspora in USA and other foreign countries where RSS is active. The RSS’ design to organise only Hindus abroad has already causing serious religion-based fissures leading to violence among the Indian diaspora in many cities of the world. This sectarian act of RSS, in fact, gives strong stimulus to followers of other religions of the diaspora to say good-bye to Indianness and organise themselves on religious basis.

RSS celebrated the Holocaust & planned to execute it for cleansing Indian Muslims & Christians

The most prominent ideologue of the RSS, MS Golwalkar (known as Guru Golwalkar in the RSS fraternity) who became RSS Supremo in 1940 has declared:

“If, as is indisputably proved, Hindusthan is the land of the Hindus and is the terra firma for the Hindu nation alone to flourish upon, what is to be the fate of all those, who, today, happen to live upon the land, though not belonging to the Hindu Race, Religion and culture.”

[Golwalkar, MS, We Or Our Nationhood Defined, Nagpur, 1939, p. 45.]

It would be like the Jews under Hitler and Mussolini. Thus, Golwalkar glorified the Holocaust in the following words:

“German Race pride has now become the topic of the day. To keep up the purity of the race and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic races—the Jews. Race pride at its highest has been manifested here. Germany has also shown how well-nigh impossible it is for races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by.”

[Ibid. –pp 34-35]

Golwalkar, finally, following the foot-steps of Hitler, arrived at the following solution for the minority “problem” in India; Muslims and Christians who were declared belonging to foreign races,

“From this stand point, sanctioned by the experience of shrewd old nations, the foreign races in Hindusthan [sic] must either adopt the Hindu culture and language, must learn to respect and hold in reverence Hindu religion, must entertain no idea but those of the glorification of the Hindu race and culture, i.e., of the Hindu nation and must lose their separate existence to merge in the Hindu race, or may stay in the country, wholly subordinated to the Hindu Nation, claiming nothing, deserving no privileges, far less any preferential treatment not even citizen’s rights. There is, at least should be, no other course for them to adopt. We are an old nation: let us deal, as old nations ought to and do deal, with the foreign races who have chosen to live in our country.”

[Ibid. pp. 47-48]

RSS rolls out racist project of producing ‘Aryan’ babies in India

According to RSS, Nazism is to be followed not only for cleansing of Muslims and Christians but also for producing the ‘Aryan’ babies as was done in Germany under Hitler. RSS has officially shared the information that one of its offshoots, Garbh Vigyan Sanskar (Uterus Science Culture), following the Vedic preaching and experiments in Germany, is conducting live trials in many parts of India for producing ‘fair’ and ‘tall’, ‘customized’ perfect babies. According to Dr. Hitesh Jani, convener of the Arogya Bharati (health wing), another outfit of RSS which is part of the project,

“Parents apparently have small, dark babies because they are impure, but purification is fortunately a simple, protocol-driven process tied to the lunar calendar. Prospective parents should copulate by astrological schedule and watch what they ingest, hear and think.”

[‘Ayurvedic eugenics: The RSS health wing promises designer babies like Germanic heroes. The fairness cream industry must be quaking.’ The Indian Express, Delhi, May 9, 2017; https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/editorials/ayurvedic-eugenics-rss-health-wing-ideal-babies-4646657/]

Neo-Nazi mass murderer of Norway, Breivik’s linkages with the RSS

Neo-Nazi mass murderer of Norway, Anders Behring Breivik, glorified Indian ‘Hindu Nationalists’. He opened a Pandora’s Box when declared “Hindu Nationalist” movement of India as a key ally in a global struggle to bring down democratic regimes across the world. Just before he went to massacre a large number of people in Norway on July 22, 2011, he released a “manifesto” of 1,518 pages, of which 102 pages dealt with the glorification of Hindutva movement of India. It declared support to “Sanatana Dharma movements and Indian nationalists in general.”

[‘Norwegian mass killer’s manifesto hails Hindutva: Goals of Indian Hindu nationalists were identical to Justiciar Knights, Anders Breivik claimed’, The Hindu, December 4, 2021. Link: http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/norwegian-mass-killers-manifesto-hails- hindutva/article2293829.ece]

1. ANTI-HINDU

RSS demands promulgation of the anti-Sudra and anti-Hindu women scripture Manusmriti discarding democratic-secular constitution of India

Those who believe that RSS wants cleansing of Muslims and Christians only know half of the reality. Its project of Hindu nation also demands a sub-human existence for Sudras (Dalits) and Hindu women. In fact, RSS wanted the Indian Constitution to be replaced by Manusmriti or Manu Code (laws of Manu) that is notorious for its derogatory and inhuman references to Sudras, Untouchables and women.

The Constituent Assembly of India finalised the Constitution of India on November 26, 1949, RSS was not happy. Its organ, Organiser in an editorial on November 30, 1949, complained:

“But in our Constitution there is no mention of the unique constitutional development in ancient Bharat. Manu’s Laws were written long before Lycurgus of Sparta or Solon of Persia. To this day his laws as enunciated in the Manusmriti excite the admiration of the world and elicit spontaneous obedience and conformity. But to our constitutional pundits that means nothing.”

By demanding promulgation of Manu Code in the Independent India RSS was simply following its mentor, philosopher and guide VD Savarkar who declared:

“Manusmriti is that scripture which is most worship-able after Vedas for our Hindu Nation and which from ancient times has become the basis of our culture-customs, thought and practice. This book for centuries has codified the spiritual and divine march of our nation. Even today the rules which are followed by crores of Hindus in their lives and practice are based on Manusmriti. Today Manusmriti is Hindu Law.”

[Savarkar, V.D., ‘Women in Manusmriti’ in Savarkar Samagar (collection of Savarkar’s writings in Hindi) volume IV, Prabhat, Delhi, 2000, p. 416.]

For RSS, Casteism is synonymous with Hindu nation

Faith of RSS brass in Manusmriti, naturally, leads them to believe in Casteism too which gave birth to the debased practice of Untouchability. For RSS Casteism is the essence of Hindu Nationalism. Golwalkar did not mince words in declaring that Casteism was synonymous with the Hindu Nation. According to him, the Hindu people are none else but,

“The Hindu People, they said, is the Virat Purusha, the Almighty manifesting Himself. Though they did not use the word ‘Hindu’, it is clear from the following description of the Almighty in Purusha-Sukta [in the 10th book of Rig Ved] wherein it is stated that the sun & the moon are His eyes, the stars and the skies are created from his nabhi [navel] and Brahmin is the head, Kshatriya the hands, Vaishya the thighs and Shudra the feet. [Italics as in the original text] This means that the people who have this fourfold arrangement, i.e., the Hindu People, is [sic] our God. This supreme vision of Godhead is the very core of our concept of ‘nation’ and has permeated our thinking and given rise to various unique concepts of our cultural heritage.”

[Golwalkar, M. S., Bunch of Thoughts, p.36-37.]

The kind of ‘Hindutva’ civilization do the RSS and their camp want to build by enforcing the laws of Manu, can be gleaned by simply glimpsing at some of the ‘laws prescribed by Manu’ for the ‘lower castes, Untouchables and women.’

Some of these dehumanizing and degenerated laws, which are presented here, are self-explanatory.

A selection of Laws of Manu denigrating Dalits/Untouchables

1. For the sake of the prosperity of the worlds (the divine one) caused the Brahmana, the Kshatriya, the Vaisya, and the Sudra to proceed from his mouth, his arm, his thighs and his feet. (I/31)
2. One occupation only the lord prescribed to the Sudras, to serve meekly even these (other) three castes. (I/91)
3. Once-born man (a Sudra), who insults a twice-born man with gross invective, shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin. (VIII/270)
4. If he mentions the names and castes (jati) of the (twice-born) with contumely, an iron nail, ten fingers long, shall be thrust red-hot into his mouth. (VIII/271)
5. If he arrogantly teaches Brahmanas their duty, the king shall cause hot oil to be poured into his mouth and into his ears. (VIII/272)
6. He who raises his hand or a stick, shall have his hand cut off; he who in anger kicks with his foot, shall have his foot cut off. (VIII/280)
7. A low-caste man who tries to place himself on the same seat with a man of a high caste, shall be branded on his hip and be banished, or (the king) shall cause his buttock to be gashed. (VIII/281)

As per the Manu Code if Sudras are to be given most stringent punishments for even petty violations/actions, the same Code of Manu is very lenient towards Brahmins.

Shloka 380 in Chapter VIII bestowing profound love on Brahmins decrees:

“Let him never slay a Brahmana, though he have committed all (possible) crimes; let him banish such an (offender), leaving all his property (to him) and (his body) unhurt.”

A selection of Laws of Manu demeaning Hindu women

1. Day and night woman must be kept in dependence by the males (of) their (families), and, if they attach themselves to sensual enjoyments, they must be kept under one’s control. (IX/2)
2. Her father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects (her) in youth, and her sons protect (her) in old age; a woman is never fit for independence. (IX/3)
3. Women do not care for beauty, nor is their attention fixed on age; (thinking), ‘(It is enough that) he is a man,’ they give themselves to the handsome and to the ugly. (IX/14)
4. Through their passion for men, through their mutable temper, through their natural heartlessness, they become disloyal towards their husbands, however carefully they may be guarded in this (world). (IX/15)
5. (When creating them) Manu allotted to women (a love of their) bed, (of their) seat and (of) ornament, impure desires, wrath, dishonesty, malice, and bad conduct. (IX/17)[2]

[The above selection of Manu’s Codes is from F. Max Muller, Laws of Manu, LP Publications, Delhi, 1996; first published in 1886. The bracket after each code incorporates number of chapter/number of code according to the above edition.]

The reproduced parts of the Manu Code above need no further elaboration and commentary. They are too glaringly iniquitous, filled with venom, supremacist and written to perpetuate degeneration against Untouchables who are referred to as Sudras by Manu. Perhaps this was the reason that the German philosopher, Friedrich Nietzsche who contributed immensely to the growth of totalitarian ideas in Europe in the 20th century, was enamoured of this this work.

Significantly, a copy of Manusmriti was burnt as a protest in the presence of Dr. BR Ambedkar during the historic Mahad agitation on December 25, 1927. Dr Ambedkar called upon Dalits to commemorate December 25 as the Manusmriti Dehen Diwas (Manusmriti burning day) in future. In fact, according to Ambedkar, it is Brahmanism, the basis of the RSS world-view that is the original brand of fascism in the history of human civilization.

[https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/andhra-pradesh/manusmriti-dahan-divas-protest-staged-at-collectorate/article30396588.ece]

Golwalkar’s dehumanised take on improving the breed of Kerala Hindus

RSS which claims to be the ‘largest world organisation of Hindus’ is, in fact, working over-time to establish the hegemony of the North Indian Brahmanical order over Hindu society in South India. The RSS brand of Brahmanism treats South Indian Hindus as inferior racially. In its world-view North Indian Brahmins are the superior lot in comparison to the rest.

And RSS does this brazenly. Golwalkar was invited to address the students of the School of Social Science of Gujarat University on December 17, 1960. In this address, while underlying his firm belief in the Race Theory, he touched upon the issue of cross-breeding of human beings in the Indian society in history. He said:

“In an effort to better the human species through cross-breeding the Namboodri Brahamanas of the North were settled in Kerala and a rule was laid down that the eldest son of a Namboodri family could marry only the daughter of Vaishya, Kashtriya or Shudra communities of Kerala. Another still more courageous rule was that the first off-spring of a married woman of any class must be fathered by a Namboodri Brahman and then she could beget children by her husband. Today this experiment will be called adultery but it was not so, as it was limited to the first child.”

[M. S. Golwalkar cited in Organiser, January 2, 1961.]

Inside the RSS: Males are Volunteers and Women are Servants

The RSS, founded in 1925, was conceived as an exclusive male organisation whose cadres were to be known as swayamsevak or volunteers. The RSS top brass made its intentions clear of treating women as of lower status than males when it decided to start its women wing; Rashtr Sevika Samiti in 1936. Its nomenclature made it clear that women members were not called as swayamsevak or volunteers but Rashtr Sevika (maids servile to the nation) or female servants of the nation; the Hindu nation. This identity of women in the Rashtr Sevika Samiti as servants was not only a technical issue but the outcome of the RSS’ attitude towards Hindu women which glorifies the subservient role of women in society.  These are Rashtr Sevika Samiti members [who according to its website number around three lakh] only who pledge to maintain ‘faithfulness/virginity’, remain ‘modest’, ‘steadfast’, and not fall prey to ‘immorality and evil habits’. The RSS male swayamsevaks make no such commitment. [https://sevikasamiti.org/Prarthana]

Mohan Bhagwat, slated to be at Madison Square Garden on August 29, misses no opportunity to emphasise the subservient role of the Hindu women. While addressing leading RSS cadres at Indore, India, a stronghold of the RSS declared that Hindu women should restrict themselves to doing household chores as per the ‘social contract’.

According to him:

“Theory of contract, theory of social contract, a husband and wife are bound by a contract which says ‘you (woman) look after the household chores and satisfy me, I (man) will take care of your needs and will protect you’, and until she delivers her duties without fail, he keeps her on the contract and if she fails to honour the contract, he disowns her…”

[‘’Women meant to do household chores’: another shocker from RSS chief’, NDTV, Delhi, January 06, 2013. Link: https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/women-meant-to-do-household-chores-another-shocker-from-rss-chief-509519]

2. ANTI DEMOCRATIC-SECULAR INDIA

RSS does not stand for an inclusive India but an exclusive Hindu nation

The organization was formed in 1925 by Keshav Baliram Hedgewar (known as Doctorji in the RSS fraternity), Balakrishna Shivram Moonje, his mentor and Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, the theorist of the idea of Hindutva. Hedgewar was in the Indian National Congress (INC) but left it as he was against all religious communities joining anti-British freedom struggle led by MK Gandhi which treated people of all religions as part of the Indian nation and stood for an inclusive independent India. A biography of Hedgewar published by the RSS describes that he parted with INC because, “Gandhiji worked constantly with one eye on Hindu– Muslim unity…But Doctorji sensed danger in that move. In fact, he did not even relish the newfangled slogan of ‘Hindu– Muslim Unity’.

[Seshadri, H. V. (ed.), Dr. Hedgewar, the Epoch-Maker: A Biography, Sahitya Sindhu, Bangalore, 1981, p. 61.]

RSS’ antipathy to a democratic-secular India

The RSS, contrary to the principles of democracy, constantly demanded India to be ruled under a totalitarian regime. Golwalkar while delivering a speech before the 1350 top level cadres of the RSS in 1940 declared,

“RSS inspired by one flag [saffron], one leader and one ideology is lighting the flame of Hindutva in each and every corner of this great land.”

[MS Golwalkar, Shri Guruji Samagar Darshan (collected works of Golwalkar in Hindi), Bhartiya Vichar Sadhna, Nagpur, nd., Volume I, p. 11.]

RSS, a ‘cultural organisation’ worships arms

RSS claims to be a cultural organisation and the largest organisation of the Hindus of the world. But it is the only cultural-religious organization on this earth which worships armaments at a Hindu festival. The RSS was founded on Dussehra (Vijay Dashmi; festival celebrated as the day of victory of God Ram over Ravana). On this day the RSS holds its biggest programme of the year which is also celebration of its founding day. The most important part of the celebration is the ”shastr pooja” (worship of the arms) by the Supremo of the RSS.

[‘RSS Festivals: Discover the six key celebrations and their significance for the Sangh’, link: https://organiser.org/2024/08/18/251909/bharat/rss-festivals-discover-the-six-key-celebrations-and-their-significance-for-the-sangh/]

Highly decorated Indian Police officer on RSS terrorism under Modi rule

There are instances of honest senior officials who had the courage to bring in public domain record RSS’ terrorist activities. How RSS spread hatred and terrorised minorities of India in less than a year of Modi first term as the PM (2014-19) of India was described in detail by one of the most decorated cops of India, Julio Ribeiro, former ambassador to Romania and recipient of the Padma Bhushan, a prominent national award in the following words. Petrified as a Christian, he wrote on March 17, 2015:

“Today, in my 86th year, I feel threatened, not wanted, reduced to a stranger in my own country.  The same category of citizens who had put their trust in me to rescue them from a force they could not comprehend have now come out of the woodwork to condemn me for practising a religion that is different from theirs. I am not an Indian anymore, at least in the eyes of the proponents of the Hindu Rashtra.

“Is it coincidence or a well-thought-out plan that the systematic targeting of a small and peaceful community should begin only after the BJP government of Narendra Modi came to power last May? ‘Ghar wapsi’, the declaration of Christmas as ‘Good Governance Day’, the attack on Christian churches and schools in Delhi, all added to a sense of siege that now afflicts these peaceful people.

Christians have consistently punched above their weight — not as much as the tiny Parsi community, but just as noticeably. Education, in particular, has been their forte. Many schools, colleges, related establishments that teach skills for jobs have been set up and run by Christians. They are much in demand. Even diehard Hindus have sought admission in such centres of learning and benefited from the commitment and sincerity of Christian teachers. Incidentally, no one seems to have been converted to Christianity, though many, many have imbibed Christian values and turned ‘pseudo-secularist’.

“The Indian army was headed by a Christian general, the navy more than once, and same with the air force. The country’s defence forces have countless men and women in uniform who are Christians. How can they be declared non-Indians by Parivar hotheads out to create a pure Hindu Rashtra?

“It is tragic that these extremists have been emboldened beyond permissible limits by an atmosphere of hate and distrust. The Christian population, a mere 2 per cent of the total populace, has been subjected to a series of well-directed body blows. If these extremists later turn their attention to Muslims, which seems to be their goal, they will invite consequences that this writer dreads to imagine.”

[‘As a Christian, suddenly I am a stranger in my own country, writes Julio Ribeiro: And, as a Christian, suddenly a stranger in my own country.’ The Indian Express, Delhi, March 17, 2015]

What happened to the Gujarati Muslims when Golwalkar’s pupil, Narendra Modi ruled the state would be clear from the following words of an editorial in a prominent English daily of India, Hindustan Times,

“Daughters were gang-raped in front of their fathers and then had their heads bashed in. Their fathers were doused with petrol and set on fire. Their property was looted. Their businesses were destroyed. And the police stood by and did nothing.” [Hindustan Times, New Delhi, March 21, 2002.]

For RSS Indian Muslims and Christians are ‘internal threat’ number 1 and 2 respectively

In fact, the ‘Holy’ book for the RSS cadres Bunch of Thoughts, has a long chapter titled as ‘Internal Threats’ in which Muslim and Christian citizens of India are described as threat number one and two respectively. This chapter opens with the following statement:

“It has been the tragic lesson of the history of many a country in the world that the hostile elements within the country pose a far greater menace to national security then aggressors from outside.”

[Golwalkar, M.S., Bunch of Thoughts, Sahitya Sindhu, Bangalore, 1996, p. 177.]

While treating Muslims as ‘Internal Threat’ number 1, Golwalkar goes on to elaborate,

“Even to this day there are so many who say, ‘now there is no Muslim problem at all. All those riotous elements who supported Pakistan have gone away once for all. The remaining Muslims are devoted to our country. After all, they have no other place to go and they are bound to remain loyal’….It would be suicidal to delude ourselves into believing that they have turned patriots overnight after the creation of Pakistan. On the contrary, the Muslim menace has increased a hundredfold by the creation of Pakistan which has become a springboard for all their future aggressive designs on our country.”

[Ibid. pp. 177-78]

While deliberating on the ‘Internal Threat’ number 2, he says,

“Such is the role of Christian gentlemen residing in our land today, out to demolish not only the religious and social fabric of our life but also to establish political domination in various pockets and if possible all over the land.”

[Ibid. p. 193.]

Sikhism, Jainism, and Buddhism denied status of independent religions

RSS regards followers of Islam and Christianity as emigrant or foreigners and demands their cleansing as these two religions are declared to be foreign religions. However, RSS has no respect for Indian religions like Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism as these are not treated as independent religions but part of Hinduism. Guru Golwalkar set the agenda by declaring that, “the Buddhists, the Jain, the Sikh are all included in that one comprehensive word ‘Hindu’.”

[Golwalkar, MS, The Spotlights, Sahitya Sindhu, Bangalore, 1974, p. 171.]

Prominent RSS ideologue Nana Deshmukh who justified 1984 Massacre of Sikhs, conferred highest national award by the Modi government

RSS claims to have always stood for the Hindu-Sikh unity. It occasionally expresses its gratitude to Sikhism for saving Hinduism from Muslim aggression. However, it must be noted that RSS does not treat Sikhism as independent religion which discarded Casteism and Brahmanical hegemony but part of the Hinduism. So far as 1984 genocide of Sikhs in India is concerned RSS blamed Sikhs for their fate. Nana Deshmukh, a prominent whole timer and ideologue of the RSS [now deceased] circulated a document titled ‘Moments of soul searching’ on November 8, 1984, justifying this horrendous genocide. Nana Deshmukh in this document presented the justification of the Sikh genocide by arguing:

1. The massacre of Sikhs was not the handiwork of any group or anti-social elements but the result of a genuine feeling of anger among Hindus.
2. Deshmukh did not distinguish the action of the two security personnel of Indira Gandhi, who happened to be Sikhs, from that of the whole Sikh community. According to his document the killers of Indira Gandhi were working under some kind of mandate of their community.
3. Sikhs themselves invited these attacks.
4. He glorified Operation Blue Star and described any opposition to it as anti-national. When Sikhs were being killed in thousands he was warning the country of Sikh extremism, thus offering ideological defense of those killings.
5. Sikh community as a whole was responsible for the violence in Punjab.
6. Sikhs should have done nothing in self-defence but showed patience and tolerance against the killer mobs.
7. These were Sikh intellectuals and not killer mobs which were responsible for the massacre. They had turned Sikhs into a militant community, cutting them off from their Hindu roots, thus inviting attacks from the nationalist Indians. Moreover, he treated all Sikhs as part of the same gang and described attacks on them as a reaction of the nationalist Hindus.
8. Shockingly, ‘Moments of Soul Searching’ was not meant for Indian state or killer squads but demanded from victim Sikhs.

Nana Deshmukh awarded ‘Bharat Ratna’ (the Jewel of India), the highest national award

As if it was not enough injustice to the martyrs and survivors of the 1984 massacre, on the eve of the 2019 Republic Day RSS-BJP rulers of India, bestowed the highest national award Bharat Ratna (the gem of India) on Nana Deshmukh. Indian Prime Minister Modi praising Deshmukh said, “He personifies humility, compassion, and service to the downtrodden. He is a Bharat Ratna in the truest sense.

[https://x.com/narendramodi/status/1088814319670910977?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1088814319670910977%7Ctwgr%5E0f83dbb514514c5dc975094e5590494af1f3a84f%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.republicworld.com%2Findia%2Fpm-modi-hails-nanaji-deshmukh-on-bharat-ratna-honour-says-his-contribution-to-rural-development-showed-the-way-for-a-new-paradigm-of-empowerment]

This article is an appeal to all citizens from North America and the United Kingdom on the truth behind the RSS: Mohan Bhagwat its supremo is visiting USA, Canada and UK and needs to be confronted with these facts.

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

[1] The present supremo Mohan Bhagwat and even the present prime minister of India, Narendra Modi have been groomed in the same mould.

[2] The above selection of Manu’s Codes is from F. Max Muller, Laws of Manu, LP Publications, Delhi, 1996; first published in 1886. The bracket after each code incorporates number of chapter/number of code according to the above edition.

Related:

51st Anniversary of Emergency in India: While the RSS supported the Emergency, it now ruthlessly presides over an ‘undeclared Emergency’

Disclosure and transparency from the RSS may finally expose decades-old ambiguities

Syama Prasad Mookerjee: ‘Patriot’ or collaborator of British Rulers & Muslim League?

The post Mohan Bhagwat, the RSS’ supremo to lead ‘Universal Oneness Celebrations’ in New York! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Sabrang India has accessed the latest letter through the Kashmiri Pandit Sangharsh Samiti (KPSS) but is withholding publication for security risks and reasons. The communication which names around half a dozen Kashmiri Pandits and identifies their residential locations in different parts of Jammu. The individuals have been described as “white collar terrorists” and “traitors” allegedly working for their “masters” in Delhi. The letter, purportedly signed by an individual named Ahmed Bilal and issued in the name of the United Liberation Council (ULC), carries an explicit warning: “wherever you are and wherever you go, we are watching your every move.”

Security agencies are examining the authenticity of both letters and attempting to identify those behind them. Officials have previously suggested that the ULC could be another front or shadow organisation of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT). The group first surfaced publicly in July, when it issued a poster marking the death anniversary of Hizbul Mujahideen commander Burhan Wani, according to officials cited by The Indian Express.

What makes the latest communication particularly alarming is its apparent attempt to establish a distinction within the Kashmiri Pandit community itself. The letter reportedly claims that Kashmiri Pandits who remained in the Valley after the mass migration of the 1990s are not its target and are “safe”. Its threats are instead directed at those who migrated and subsequently returned to Kashmir for government employment, as well as individuals accused by the letter of attempting to implement an “RSS agenda” in the Valley. That distinction is significant because the latest threats appear closely tied to the government’s rehabilitation and employment programme for displaced Kashmiri Pandits.

The detailed report on the first threatening letter may be read here.

A second letter, a deeper concern

The latest communication follows an earlier threat letter circulated online earlier this month. That letter reportedly named Kashmiri Pandit employees working in the Revenue Department and published their phone numbers. According to The Indian Express, the communication attempted to associate their government duties with the seizure of properties allegedly linked to terrorists.

The first letter had already triggered significant security concerns. The Jammu and Kashmir administration reportedly instructed departments to allow Kashmiri Pandit employees to remain away from work and advised them to stay alert and move to safer locations if necessary. There was, however, no publicly available formal order governing the reported work-from-home arrangement. Different accounts placed the period of leave at August 20, August 25 or until Independence Day.

The second letter changes the nature of the threat. The earlier communication exposed telephone numbers. The latest reportedly exposes residential addresses, down to the house and street level. According to the Indian Express, officials said this is the first time in several decades that threat communications targeting Kashmiri Pandits have reportedly contained such precise residential information. That raises a question that goes beyond the contents of the letters themselves: how are individuals issuing anonymous threats gaining access to such detailed information?

Sanjay Tickoo: ‘How can the government talk about return when it cannot guarantee safety?’

Speaking to Sabrang India on the second threat letter, Sanjay Tickoo, president of the Kashmiri Pandit Sangharsh Samiti, sharply questioned the political narrative around the return of Kashmiri Pandits to the Valley. He pointed specifically to remarks by Jammu and Kashmir BJP General Secretary (Organisation) Ashok Koul, who, while speaking in Shopian, described the return of Kashmiri Pandits as a positive development but said that targeted killings would not stop and that the community would have to face challenges and struggle while rebuilding their lives in Kashmir. For Tickoo, the statement exposes a fundamental contradiction. “How can he say targeted killings won’t stop?” he asked, arguing that if the government accepts targeted violence as an unavoidable reality, then the Union government must also acknowledge the failure of its security and rehabilitation policies rather than celebrating the return of Kashmiri Pandits without addressing the risks they face. He questioned the idea of presenting the return of Pandits as a success while employees continue to fear for their lives.

Tickoo also pointed to what he described as an even more alarming development in the second letter: additional personal information has reportedly been exposed, including the registration number of one employee’s vehicle. According to him, this suggests that the problem may extend beyond information already available on social media and raises questions about possible leaks from within the departments where Kashmiri Pandit employees work. He argued that the increasing presence of PM Package employees across government departments has made them more visible, but also potentially more vulnerable, particularly if confidential information is being accessed by people within or around those institutions. Tickoo questioned the government’s repeated attribution of the threats to an alleged Lashkar-e-Taiba offshoot without first establishing how such precise information is reaching those issuing the threats.

He also raised concerns about overground workers (OGWs) and the security network within government institutions. Referring to reports that hundreds of suspected OGWs had been re-arrested ahead of Independence Day, Tickoo drew a parallel with the 1990s and claimed that, based on his experience, people associated with overground militant networks have existed across different government departments. His concern, he said, is not about labelling individuals without evidence, but about the inability of ordinary employees to know who may have access to their personal information or who can potentially compromise their security. If the government says the threats originate from a LeT-linked group, he asked, how can it establish that conclusively rather than simply attribute every such incident to an organisation operating from across the border?

For Tickoo, the government’s handling of the work-from-home arrangement further demonstrates the problem. Even after the first threat letter, he said, there was no clear official communication informing Kashmiri Pandit employees that they could work from home. The decision was instead conveyed informally, with Independence Day security arrangements becoming an additional reason for employees to remain away from their workplaces. Now that the second letter has emerged, Tickoo said, there is again no clarity over whether employees are expected to return to their offices or continue working from home. “What now?” is the question confronting employees who have already been named and identified.

At the heart of Tickoo’s concern is what he describes as a security problem that may be internal as much as external. The government may identify a militant organisation behind the threats, but that does not answer how the names, phone numbers, residential addresses and even vehicle details of vulnerable employees are reaching those circulating the letters. Tickoo argues that the increasing visibility of Kashmiri Pandits employed across government departments under the PM Package must be accompanied by a corresponding system of protection and data security. Otherwise, the very employment programme intended to facilitate rehabilitation could make employees easier to identify and target.

He also questioned the repeated denial of threats by the Union government and the Lieutenant Governor’s administration since 2019. If authorities continue to insist that there is no broader threat to Kashmiri Pandits, Tickoo asks, how will the latest series of threats, the circulation of increasingly detailed personal information and the continuing fear among employees ever be addressed? For him, the issue is no longer simply whether another threat letter is genuine. It is whether the State is prepared to acknowledge the insecurity faced by the community—and take responsibility for making its promised return to the Valley genuinely safe.

Notably, in his conversation with Sabrang India after the first threat emerged, Tickoo had argued that the latest threat cannot be treated as an isolated incident. For him, the more troubling question is how personal information of Prime Minister’s Package employees continues to reach those issuing threats. Tickoo said that lists containing the names and details of package employees have been circulating on social media for years, including after the 2022 threats, and alleged that the information being used in the latest episode is drawn from the same publicly available lists.

He said the government must establish how such information is being accessed and circulated and why, despite repeated meetings with the Home Department since 2022, no effective solution has emerged. He also pointed to the contradiction at the heart of the rehabilitation policy: employees are expected to return to Kashmir and continue living and working in the Valley, but when threats emerge, they are asked to remain indoors or leave for safer locations. “If such situations happen, Kashmiri Pandits feel unsafe and then move out,” Tickoo said, arguing that they then risk losing the limited benefits attached to a package that requires them to continue living and working in the Valley.

He further questioned the absence of a formal government order directing employees to stay home, suggesting that authorities often avoid putting such decisions in writing because doing so would amount to acknowledging a security failure and could invite legal scrutiny. For Tickoo, the said episode is therefore not merely about another threat letter; it is about the erosion of confidence in the security establishment and the growing contradiction between asking Kashmiri Pandits to return and failing to make that return secure and sustainable.

The detailed report may be read here.

The issue is particularly sensitive because the targeted employees are not simply members of the Kashmiri Pandit community. They are among those who have returned to the Valley under the government’s rehabilitation and employment framework.

Around 6,000 Kashmiri Pandits have been provided government employment under the Prime Minister’s Special Employment Package, introduced in 2010 to facilitate the return and rehabilitation of those displaced from Kashmir following the outbreak of armed insurgency in 1990. The package was designed around the idea that employment could help facilitate the community’s return to the Valley. But the latest developments expose the vulnerability at the heart of that model.

Employees are encouraged to return to Kashmir to work. Yet when threats emerge, they are advised not to attend their workplaces, remain indoors or move to safer locations. Those specifically named in the threats have reportedly been shifted to Jammu. The contradiction is increasingly difficult to ignore: a policy premised on return cannot be sustained if returning employees repeatedly have to be evacuated for their own safety.

The shadow of 2022

The latest threats also carry the memory of the violence of 2022. That year, militants carried out a series of targeted attacks against Kashmiri Pandit employees, killing five. The attacks triggered prolonged protests by employees appointed under the Prime Minister’s Package, who demanded that they be transferred out of the Valley and posted in Jammu. The government did not agree to permanently transfer them to Jammu. Instead, employees were moved to locations in Srinagar and other parts of the Valley considered comparatively safer. The protests exposed a fundamental disagreement over the meaning of rehabilitation.

For the employees, safety was a precondition to remaining in Kashmir. For the government, continued employment in the Valley remained central to the rehabilitation framework. The latest threats have brought that unresolved tension back to the surface.

‘This threat should not be taken lightly’

The seriousness of the situation has also been acknowledged by the political leadership. After the first letter had surfaced, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah had warned that the threats against Kashmiri Pandit employees could not be taken lightly, particularly given the history of targeted killings of minorities in the Valley.

He said that some employees had wanted to leave following the earlier threats but had effectively been confined to their camps for security reasons. According to NDTV, he called for action against those responsible and urged authorities to ensure the safety of Kashmiri Pandit employees.

National Conference president Farooq Abdullah, after the first threat, called for the Union Home Ministry to investigate the threats and questioned why Kashmiri Pandits have been specifically targeted when people of different faiths continue to live and work in Kashmir. He also questioned the use of social media to circulate the threats and asked who was behind the communications.

Security concerns are widening

The threats have emerged amid a broader deterioration in the security environment in parts of Kashmir. On July 22, a policeman was killed in Anantnag town after terrorists allegedly fired at him at close range. Nine days later, on July 31, two migrant workers from Chhattisgarh were killed at a brick kiln in Kulgam. The incidents have contributed to renewed concerns about the vulnerability of civilians, migrant workers and minorities.

The security environment has also affected the Amarnath Yatra. The pilgrimage began on July 3 and was scheduled to continue until August 28. The traditional Anantnag-Pahalgam route was suspended on July 23, while the Yatra was subsequently curtailed and suspended from August 9. Officials cited low pilgrim footfall, weather advisories and repair work on the tracks among the reasons for the changes. It is against this backdrop that the second threat letter has surfaced.

Related:

How Can Rehabilitation Work If We Are Not Safe?’ Sanjay Tickoo on the fresh threat to Kashmiri Pandit employees

This is what we feared: Sanjay Tickoo on the rising attacks in Kashmir since March

Pleas of non-migrant Kashmiri Pandits have fallen on deaf ears: Sanjay Tickoo

Time has come to go on fast unto death: Sanjay Tickoo

Kashmiri Pandit leader Sanjay Tickoo talks about Governor’s Rule in J&K

A Kashmiri Pandit fact-checks The Kashmir Files

10 reasons why Kashmiri Pandits feel betrayed in the Valley

The post ‘Wherever You Go, We are watching’: Second threat letter to Kashmiri Pandits appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Bengaluru, Aug. 18: “The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls being conducted in various states, including Karnataka, is not merely a process of revising electoral rolls. It is a ‘Nazi-Fascist project’ aimed at disenfranchising voters and implementing the NRC through the backdoor. It is being driven by political leaders who are behaving in a fascist manner,” said senior retired IAS officer M.G. Devasahayam, who has studied the SIR process in this special interview to Kannada daily, Vartabharati.

M.G. Devasahayam, a retired IAS officer and member of the Constitution Conduct Group, has extensive experience in electoral processes and the electoral reforms required in the country. He also played an important role in bringing to light issues related to alleged vote manipulation and vote theft during the 2024 elections. In an exclusive interview with Vartha Bharathi, he spoke about the SIR process being conducted in Karnataka and several other states.

Interviewer: What is the reason for such a large number of voters being deleted during the SIR process in Karnataka? Is the problem with the process itself or with the very concept behind SIR?

Devasahayam: “SIR is a fraud on the democratic process. The way it has been designed itself is not an honest process. The Election Commission has not properly designed an SIR in accordance with the rules, regulations and constitutional provisions. According to information revealed through the RTI, SIR was not decided upon by the Election Commission of India itself.

“They have openly said, ‘We did not decide this.’ If that is the case, perhaps political leaders such as the Home Minister decided it and imposed it on the Election Commission of India. In my opinion, the Chief Election Commissioner is someone who can easily succumb to political pressure, while the other two Election Commissioners exist only in name.

“Normally, all three are IAS officers. We know how IAS officers function. We know how a scheme is formulated, how its structure is designed and how it is subsequently implemented. SIR has not been properly designed, nor has its structure been properly worked out. It is now being implemented hurriedly and in an extremely improper manner.

“They wanted to bring the NRC—the National Register of Citizens. There were massive protests against it, so they had to withdraw it.

“There are two objectives behind conducting SIR. One is to implement the NRC through the backdoor using the Election Commission. The second is to disenfranchise people. Who are likely to be disenfranchised? Those who are not organised, minorities and people who do not have documents.

“Therefore, the entire process has been conducted in an extremely improper and bizarre manner. The objective is to disenfranchise as many people as possible who are less likely to vote for the ruling party and to implement the NRC through the backdoor.”

Interviewer: So, did they begin this process without framing any proper rules? Is the mapping under SIR constitutionally valid?

Devasahayam: “Yes. That is why there is complete confusion everywhere. Instead of adding voters, the process is resulting in people being excluded from the electoral rolls. Whenever any programme designed for the people is implemented, it must be practicable and capable of being implemented effectively.

“Do you have to link it to what happened in 2002–03? They are asking whether you were there in 2002, whether your parents were there, and to establish a relationship based on that. That was 23 years ago. How can this be done practically?

“For example, I am now 85 years old. I moved from Tamil Nadu to Bengaluru four years ago. Since I am no longer in Tamil Nadu, my name has been removed from the electoral roll there. But nobody here has contacted me. How am I supposed to prove where I was in 2002? I was in Chennai in 2002, and my parents are no longer alive. They died before 2003. Therefore, this mapping is a questionable process.

“Coming to the constitutional aspect, the Constitution guarantees universal adult suffrage. It must be an inclusive process. Every citizen who is eligible to vote must be included in the electoral roll. The right to vote is also a fundamental right and a human right. If there is serious doubt about whether someone is a citizen and it is proven that the person is not an Indian citizen by birth or through any other means, only then can that person be excluded from the electoral roll.

“Otherwise, I am an Indian citizen. I was born here about 85 years ago. I have been living here. I am an Indian citizen. Why should I have to prove it? What should I show to prove it? Since I am an educated person, I may have some certificates. But millions and crores of people do not have certificates. They do not have school certificates, degree certificates or other documents.

“This is a rotten fascist-Nazi project.”

“Another problem is that the entire process has been left completely in the hands of government officials. BLOs are lower-level government staff. The entire process has been placed in their hands. It has reached a stage where an Anganwadi worker is expected to determine whether you are a citizen or not, and whether you are a voter or not.

“The role of higher-level officials has been reduced to a mere formality. The entire process has been turned into a completely bureaucratic exercise. Shouldn’t there be verification and auditing for such a massive process? Even ordinary small-scale activities are subject to verification and audits. So, for such a huge process, there should be a social audit, as we suggested right from the beginning.

“Social audits are conducted at gram panchayats and ward levels in cities. People themselves should come together. The draft electoral roll should be placed before them. They know who is there and who is not.

“Who is best placed to know who lives in a village and who its citizens are? It is the people of that village. Therefore, a Gram Sabha should be convened. The draft electoral roll should be read out and the people should be asked, ‘This is the list we have prepared. Is it correct?’

“They may say, ‘This person does not live here; they have moved elsewhere.’ Then that person can be removed. At the same time, they may say, ‘This person has been living here for many years, but their name is not on the list.’ Then that person can be added.

“After that, the panchayat should sign off on it in an open meeting. Once it is approved, it should become the final electoral roll.”

Interviewer: But where do these BLOs go? Do they visit apartments?

Devasahayam: “For example, they have still not come to my apartment. There are about 90 homes in my apartment complex. I was told that the BLO came to the manager, sat there for a short while and left. But I did not receive an enumeration form. Now they may have deleted my name from the electoral roll or may not have included me. Across the country, more than 5–6 crore people have already been removed.

“I believe that around one crore people in Karnataka will be left out of the draft electoral roll.

“Now the question is: What kind of process should we call this? I believe even the Supreme Court approved this without properly understanding the issue. This rotten process should be stopped immediately and rejected completely. I do not even want to discuss this any further.”

Interviewer: In this situation, what would you like to tell the Karnataka government and the people?

Devasahayam: “After seeing the chaos in Bihar, West Bengal and other states, we expected that this would come to Karnataka as well. Therefore, we had taken precautionary measures. I was guiding people from civil society. I told them to demand a social audit. Karnataka is a suitable state for conducting a social audit because it has a strong tradition in the Panchayati Raj system.

“On the other hand, Karnataka also has a State Election Commission. Just like the Election Commission, it can also play a role in preparing a proper and credible electoral roll. Therefore, the process should be initiated through the State Election Commission, involving panchayats and ward committees. A proper social audit should be conducted through them.

“That would give people confidence. No one should be left out of the electoral roll. People should have the confidence that their vote exists. If someone has been removed, it must be ensured that it was done for a genuine and justifiable reason.

“We held a series of discussions with political leaders on this issue because political parties should have been involved. We had a meeting with the Deputy Chief Minister. He is now the Chief Minister. All of them said, ‘Yes, it is a good suggestion. We will do it.’

“In some villages, it was even implemented on a trial basis. A note was also prepared. But before taking the final decision, they said, ‘We have to get permission from the high command.’

“One of them went to Delhi with this proposal. But the high command sabotaged it. The Congress high command office is filled with RSS elements. I do not want to name them. Some of the people surrounding Rahul Gandhi are RSS agents. They immediately sabotaged the proposal. My allegation is that they have joined hands with the RSS to disenfranchise as many voters as possible.

“If the state governments had been given the freedom to take an independent decision, they might have done it. They could have passed a resolution and even amended the process to make social audits mandatory. But according to the information I have, the high command sabotaged it.

“The Congress is behaving very strangely on this issue. They too have joined hands with RSS elements. They have not put up any strong resistance on this issue. Their approach is one of verbal opposition but inaction in practice.

“As a result, lakhs and crores of people in Karnataka too are going to be deprived of their right to vote. This is not democracy. This is a fraud being carried out in the name of democracy. That is the reality.

“Civil society has done whatever it could. But political parties have abandoned the people in the worst possible manner. Whatever happens, civil society organisations must not abandon the people. They must continue to put pressure on the Congress government. Sooner or later, all of this will come to light.”

(The original of this interview was published in Kannada by Vartabharati. The original may be read here.)

Related:

‘Forum for Electoral Integrity’ petitions NHRC over mass voter disenfranchisement under SIR

The Bihar Verdict 2025: How an election was engineered before votes were cast

Civil society warns, Election Commission is “Undermining Democracy”

The post “SIR is a Nazi-Fascist Project:” M.G. Devasahayam appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Recent figures reported through an RTI investigation by The Indian Express suggest that India is witnessing an unprecedented expansion of government-backed content restrictions. Between March and July 2026, government agencies issued nearly 1.95 lakh blocking directions to Instagram, Facebook and YouTube. According to the report, this amounted to roughly 1,275 directions every day, or approximately one direction every 68 seconds. Instagram alone received nearly one lakh directions, Facebook around 80,000 and YouTube approximately 15,000.

The scale becomes even more striking when compared with the previous period for which comparable figures are available. RTI data accessed by The Indian Express showed that between October 2024 and October 2025, 2,312 blocking orders were sent to 19 online platforms through the government’s Sahyog portal. That amounted to roughly six orders a day. In the following five months, directions to just three major platforms rose to almost 1.95 lakh. Such a dramatic increase cannot be treated merely as an administrative statistic. It raises a much larger question about the changing relationship between the State, technology companies and citizens in India’s digital public sphere. And the timing makes that question even more difficult to ignore.

When protest moves online, censorship follows

A significant proportion of the latest blocking directions reportedly coincided with the student protests over examination irregularities and leaks in Delhi. The Indian Express, citing a senior government official, reported that a considerable share of the directions were issued as the NEET protests gathered momentum, particularly on Instagram. This is important because Instagram was not simply being used as a space in which the protests were discussed after they happened. It became one of the principal spaces through which the movement itself was organised.

The material compiled in the research shows how the Cockroach Janta Party’s social-media presence became central to the mobilisation, with protest announcements, videos, memes, explainers and other political content circulating rapidly among young users. The account reportedly grew to millions of followers and played an important role in mobilising people for demonstrations, including the July 20 “Sansad Chalo” march. That transformation of social media into a political organising space has a profound constitutional consequence.

A protest today does not begin only when people gather on a street. It begins when people communicate. They decide where to meet, circulate information about police action, share videos from the ground, publicise their demands and tell others what is happening. The digital space has therefore become part of the infrastructure of democratic protest itself. Consequently, restricting that space can affect far more than an individual’s ability to upload a post. It can affect the ability of a movement to organise, document itself and communicate with the wider public. This is why the reported restrictions during the protests deserve particularly close scrutiny.

Article 14, for instance, reported that journalist Sadhika Tiwari’s video showing a student allegedly being beaten by police was blocked on X following a government order. The video, according to the report, showed a crying student and did not contain hate speech, misinformation or graphic imagery. Around the same period, Meta temporarily blocked the Instagram account associated with CJP, which reportedly had more than 23 million followers, although the account was subsequently restored after criticism. The significance of such incidents lies not merely in whether one particular video was lawfully restricted. It lies in the fact that videos documenting State action during a protest are themselves part of the democratic record.

If citizens cannot see what happened on the streets, they cannot independently evaluate competing claims about what happened there. If videos documenting police conduct disappear before they can circulate widely, public debate becomes dependent increasingly upon official accounts of events. That is precisely where the problem of censorship becomes a problem of democracy.

The three-hour problem

The most troubling development, however, may not be the number of takedown directions alone. It is the shrinking amount of time available to platforms to respond to them. As Article 14 reported, the period within which intermediaries are expected to comply with certain government requests has been progressively reduced, eventually reaching three hours in 2026. The investigation linked this shrinking compliance period with the sharp increase in government takedown directions. Three hours may sound like an administrative efficiency measure. It is not difficult to see why it becomes something much more consequential when the subject is constitutionally protected speech.

Imagine a government order directing a platform to remove a journalist’s report. Before complying, the platform would ideally need to determine whether the issuing authority has jurisdiction, whether the order identifies the material adequately, whether the statutory requirements have been met, whether the content actually falls within the legal grounds for restriction and whether the restriction is proportionate. The affected journalist may also need an opportunity to respond. A court may eventually have to examine the order. Yet the platform is given only a few hours to act.

Under those circumstances, the rational institutional response is unlikely to be a careful legal assessment. It is likely to be compliance first and review later. That creates an important constitutional problem. A system that imposes severe consequences for delayed compliance but relatively weak consequences for wrongful removal creates an obvious incentive for platforms to err on the side of deletion. The consequence is what free-speech activists have long warned about: over-removal.

Lawful speech does not have to be formally prohibited for censorship to occur. It is enough for platforms to become sufficiently afraid of retaining controversial material that they begin removing content whenever there is doubt.

Sahyog and the transformation of censorship into infrastructure

The government’s Sahyog portal illustrates another aspect of this changing architecture. Introduced in October 2024, Sahyog was designed to streamline communication between government authorities and online intermediaries. In itself, there is nothing inherently problematic about creating an administrative mechanism through which lawful government directions can be communicated to technology companies. But administrative efficiency cannot substitute for constitutional safeguards.

Article 14 reported that X challenged Sahyog before the Karnataka High Court, arguing that the system effectively facilitated censorship by allowing government requests to reach platforms through a centralised mechanism. The Karnataka High Court rejected the challenge in July 2025 and characterised Sahyog as a facilitation mechanism rather than an independent censorship authority. That judicial characterisation is important, but it does not end the constitutional debate.

A communication system may technically be nothing more than a channel. The real constitutional question concerns what happens after the communication reaches the platform. If a government direction arrives through an official portal, carries the appearance of State authority and has to be acted upon within three hours, the practical ability of a platform to question that direction becomes extremely limited. The portal may facilitate communication.

But when that communication is backed by an extremely short compliance window and automated enforcement, the overall system can begin functioning as something considerably more powerful: an infrastructure through which State decisions about speech are translated rapidly into restrictions on citizens’ access to information.

When the algorithm becomes the censor

This is perhaps the most disturbing development. According to The Indian Express, Meta integrated its systems with Sahyog to comply with the three-hour requirement, allowing content identified through government directions to be restricted or removed automatically rather than waiting for a separate human review before compliance. Automation is attractive because it makes compliance efficient. But constitutional rights are precisely the kind of interests that should make us suspicious of efficiency without accountability.

A human decision-maker can, at least theoretically, ask whether a government direction is valid. An automated system cannot meaningfully interrogate the constitutional legitimacy of the State’s demand. It receives an instruction and executes it. The danger is therefore not simply that the government can order content to be removed. The danger is that a government instruction can increasingly be converted into an automated technical command. The chain becomes remarkably simple: the State issues the direction, the platform’s system receives it, the content is restricted and the user discovers that the speech has disappeared.

A citizen cannot challenge a decision that they cannot see

The question of notice is therefore central. Alt News has documented instances in which users received generic notifications stating that content had been restricted pursuant to a legal request or through an automated process, without being provided meaningful information about the specific legal basis or authority involved.

This creates a basic procedural problem. If a person does not know who ordered the restriction, they cannot determine whether the authority had jurisdiction. If they do not know which law was invoked, they cannot assess whether the restriction is legally sustainable. If they do not know why their particular content was unlawful, they cannot meaningfully challenge the decision. And if they cannot access the order itself, they may not even know what exactly they are supposed to challenge. This is where transparency stops being a policy preference and becomes a constitutional necessity. The State cannot reasonably expect citizens to defend their right to speak against an order whose existence, reasoning and legal basis remain hidden from them.

The disappearance of journalism is more serious than the disappearance of content

The consequences become particularly serious when the material being restricted is journalism. Article 14 reported that in March 2026 alone, Facebook pages belonging to at least six news and digital publications were blocked. The report also identified restrictions involving Greater Kashmir, Rising Kashmir, Kashmir Life, Molitics India, National Dastak and 4PM News Network, among others. The Wire, Maktoob Media and Peek TV have similarly reported restrictions affecting their content.

The problem here is fundamentally different from the removal of ordinary user-generated material. A journalist reporting on a protest is not simply generating “content”. They are creating a record of a public event. A report about Kashmir may become part of the historical record of the region, a video documenting police action may later become evidence in litigation, or a report concerning government policy may inform electoral choices. When such material disappears without clear explanation, the damage therefore extends beyond the individual publisher.

The public loses access to information that may be essential to holding power accountable. That is why the freedom of the press cannot be protected merely by allowing newspapers to continue printing. In 2026, press freedom also requires journalists to be able to reach audiences through the digital platforms on which those audiences increasingly depend.

The State’s concern about decentralised communication is not irrelevant — but it is not enough

The controversy surrounding Bitchat, Briar and Bridgefy demonstrates that the problem extends beyond mainstream social-media platforms. During the Jantar Mantar protests, demonstrators reportedly turned to Bluetooth-based mesh communication applications that could facilitate communication between nearby devices without relying entirely on conventional mobile internet infrastructure.

The government’s concern was that such systems could make lawful interception, identification and investigation more difficult. According to reports, the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre issued directions seeking the removal of Bitchat, Briar and Bridgefy from major app stores and also sought action against Bitchat’s GitHub repository. Medianama reported that the notices provided intermediaries with three hours to comply, although officials later orally instructed companies not to enforce the directions.

ThePrint reported that the I4C notice to GitHub invoked Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act read with Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT Rules and sought removal of Bitchat’s repositories within three hours. There is a legitimate public-interest argument here. Communication technologies can be abused for criminal activity, and the State cannot be expected to remain completely powerless when technology is used to facilitate serious offences. But that cannot be the end of the analysis.

The fact that a technology can be misused does not establish that the technology itself should be suppressed. A telephone can be used to organise a crime. A messaging application can be used to coordinate violence. Social media can spread misinformation. None of these facts, by themselves, justify eliminating the technology. The State must still establish why the restriction is necessary, why less restrictive alternatives would not work and why the particular application or communication mechanism presents a sufficiently serious and demonstrable threat. Otherwise, “public order” becomes a justification capable of swallowing the right to communicate altogether.

The constitutional framework is not optional

India does not indulge this issue without constitutional guidance. Article 19(1)(a) guarantees freedom of speech and expression, while Article 19(2) permits reasonable restrictions on specified grounds. The Supreme Court’s decision in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India remains a foundational judgment in understanding the limits of online speech regulation.

The Court’s decision is important precisely because it recognises that vague or overbroad restrictions can have a chilling effect on legitimate expression. The existence of a statutory power, therefore, cannot by itself answer the constitutional question. The State must still demonstrate that the restriction falls within the law and survives constitutional scrutiny. That is particularly important where the restriction affects political expression.

Political speech lies at the heart of democratic participation. Criticism of government policy, reporting on protests, documenting police action and exposing administrative failures cannot be placed in the same category as genuinely unlawful material merely because they are inconvenient or controversial. The State must be able to distinguish speech that is unlawful from speech that is merely uncomfortable. That distinction is the foundation of a functioning democracy.

Another concern emerging from the reporting is the increasingly routine character of mechanisms originally justified by urgency. Emergency powers exist for a reason. There are situations in which authorities may need to act quickly to prevent serious and immediate harm. But emergency mechanisms become constitutionally dangerous when the exception starts functioning as the ordinary route for restricting speech.

Article 14 reported concerns among technology-policy experts that emergency blocking mechanisms could increasingly become part of routine online governance, particularly because affected parties may not receive the underlying orders and therefore have limited opportunities to challenge them. The constitutional problem can be stated simply. An emergency procedure should make the State faster when speed is genuinely necessary. It should not make the State less accountable because it has chosen to act quickly. If anything, extraordinary powers should trigger stronger review precisely because they reduce the opportunity for the affected person to respond beforehand.

Platforms are not innocent bystanders

The responsibility, however, does not rest with the government alone. Technology companies have enormous power over what citizens can see, publish and circulate. They therefore have their own obligations of transparency. The Indian Express reporting indicates that Meta generally provides users in several jurisdictions with information when governments request restrictions on their content, but that such disclosures are not provided in India and some other markets because of legal and regulatory considerations. That should concern anyone who believes that users have a right to understand why their speech has been restricted.

A platform should not be able to tell a journalist merely that their report is unavailable because of a “legal requirement”. The journalist should know whether the government ordered the restriction, which authority issued the order and which law was invoked. Transparency does not necessarily prevent compliance. A platform can comply with a lawful government direction while still informing the affected user that the government sought the restriction. Indeed, transparency may be one of the few mechanisms capable of ensuring that government censorship does not become invisible.

The reported proposal by X to make government requests more visible to users therefore deserves attention. According to recent reports, Elon Musk announced that X would begin making government requests to restrict or remove content more transparent, including information about the requesting authority and, where available, the legal basis for the request.

The Indian government has understandably maintained that platforms operating in India remain subject to Indian law. But that is not inconsistent with transparency. The two principles can coexist. If the State has lawfully ordered a restriction, there should be no reason for the process to remain invisible. Government censorship should not become anonymous censorship.

India must decide what kind of digital democracy it wants

There is a legitimate State interest in regulating harmful online material. There is a legitimate public interest in combating misinformation, incitement, deepfakes, threats and criminal coordination. Technology companies cannot claim absolute immunity from the laws of the countries in which they operate. But none of these propositions answers the central constitutional question.

How much power should the State possess to determine what citizens are allowed to see, publish and circulate — and what safeguards must accompany that power?

Nearly 1.95 lakh blocking directions in five months, as reported by The Indian Express, should force that question into the centre of India’s democratic debate. The answer cannot simply be that the government has followed a procedure. A procedure that is too fast to meaningfully challenge, too opaque to independently scrutinise and too automated to permit genuine review can satisfy the appearance of legality while undermining the substance of constitutional protection.

Indian law therefore needs stronger safeguards around government-directed content restrictions. Orders should clearly identify the legal provision relied upon, the authority issuing them and the reasons for restricting the particular material. Affected users should ordinarily receive notice and have access to a meaningful appeal mechanism. Emergency orders should be subject to prompt independent review and should automatically lapse unless their continuation is justified. Platforms should publish greater information about government requests, including anonymised data that allows the public to assess how frequently such powers are being used and how often they are challenged or withdrawn. Most importantly, the burden cannot silently shift from the State having to justify censorship to the citizen having to prove why their speech should remain online.

The extraordinary rise in takedown directions, the targeting of protest-related content, the restrictions imposed on journalists and news organisations, the attempt to interfere with decentralised communication tools and the increasing use of automated compliance together point towards a digital environment in which the speed of censorship may be outpacing the speed of accountability.

Related:

How Can Rehabilitation Work If We Are Not Safe?’ Sanjay Tickoo on the fresh threat to Kashmiri Pandit employees

JNU Cancels Venue, Not the Conversation: Umar Khalid’s book discussion moves outdoors amid protests

After NEET protests ended, the battle moved online: Women protesters face threats, doxing and criminalisation

#STOPKILLINGUS Protest at Jantar Mantar on August 4 against GOI’s “cover-up” of Manual Scavenging deaths

The Supreme Court’s Uneasy Middle Path on Protest Policing

Ken-Betwa protest exposes the cost of state-led displacement

The post The State Wants the Delete Button: India’s new architecture of digital censorship appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The draft roll was handed over to representatives of recognised political parties at a meeting chaired by Punjab Chief Electoral Officer Anindita Mitra on August 13. Political parties were also briefed about the forms to be used during the claims and objections process.

Form 6 can be used for inclusion of names, Form 6A for enrolment of eligible overseas Indian voters, Form 7 for deletion of names and Form 8 for correction of entries or shifting of residence.

Nearly 20 lakh electors not covered by enumeration

According to officials, enumeration forms of nearly 1.94 crore (19.4 million) electors out of Punjab’s total electorate of around 2.14 crore (21.4 million) were collected and digitised during the house-to-house enumeration exercise. The remaining more than 20 lakh electors, accounting for 9.63 per cent of the total electorate, were categorised under the ASDD — absent, shifted, dead or duplicate — category.

The house-to-house enumeration exercise was conducted from June 25 to August 3 as part of the SIR process.

The categorisation of such a large number of electors means that the claims and objections period will be an important stage for voters who could not be covered during the enumeration exercise or whose names do not appear in the draft roll.

CEO asks electors to check names

The Punjab CEO’s office has asked electors to check their details in the published draft roll. The draft is available through the Chief Electoral Officer, Punjab website and the Election Commission’s voter services portal. A special camp was also organised at all polling booths on August 16 to help electors check their details and access electoral services. Booth Level Officers were made available at polling stations from 10 am to 1 pm for assistance.

Help desks have also been set up at the offices of District Election Officers and Electoral Registration Officers to facilitate access to the draft roll.

Citizens turning 18 by October 1, 2026 are eligible to seek enrolment, according to the CEO’s office.

Social media complaints point to difficulties during Punjab SIR enumeration

While official communication from the Punjab election authorities has highlighted voter assistance and arrangements made during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR), posts and replies on the official social media account of the Chief Electoral Officer, Punjab also contain complaints from electors about difficulties during the enumeration and verification process.

On August 14, a user, Rahul Dadhwal, complained that the information available to him was incorrect and that money had been spent without resolving the issue. He wrote: “Koi v information Sahi nahi kida check kariya, sab sada paisa waste” — “No information was correct. We checked everything, and all our money was wasted.”

Koi v information Sahi nahi kida check kariya , sab sada paisa waste .

— Rahul Dadhwal (@rahuldadhwal8) August 14, 2026

The post was subsequently followed by a response from the CEO Punjab office asking the user to share personal details and a brief description of the problem through direct message so that the concerned team could assist.

Thank you for contacting Office of Chief Electoral Officer, Punjab
Please DM your name, mobile number, District, Assembly Constituency, and a brief description of your issue. The concerned team will contact you for necessary assistance.

— Chief Electoral Officer, Punjab (@TheCEOPunjab) August 17, 2026

Other posts on the same official account also raised specific concerns about the enumeration exercise.

A user identifying himself as Aditya alleged that his mother, who is alive, had been marked as deceased and consequently removed from the Punjab SIR draft electoral roll. He claimed that she had filled and submitted the Enumeration Form and questioned how the error had occurred.

@TheCEOPunjab @ECISVEEP
My mother is alive,but her name has been removed from the Punjab SIR draft electoral roll by incorrectly marking her as deceased. She had duly filled and submitted the Enumeration Form as well.Was this done intentionally to remove voters?
EPIC: TXO3368289

— Aditya (@MunishK1007) August 15, 2026

Another user, posting on August 16, alleged that members of the public were facing harassment at the hands of Booth Level Officers (BLOs), whom the user described as inadequately trained.

Great harrasment of public at BLO hands they are not well trained @TheCEOPunjab

— noreligion (@nofoodsecurity) August 16, 2026

A separate complaint from a Ludhiana resident said that she had been living in the city for more than 25 years and had shifted her residence from Ludhiana North to Ludhiana West. She alleged that she was unable to obtain her EPIC number because no BLO was helping her and that the application was showing “NO RESULT FOUND”. The complaint was addressed to the Election Commission and Punjab election authorities.

Link: https://x.com/GoyelJ/status/2089030135123267590?s=20

The responses from the CEO Punjab account in these cases were similar, asking complainants to share their details privately so that the concerned team could examine the matter.

These exchanges do not, by themselves, establish whether the complaints were caused by errors in the SIR process, technical problems, mistakes during enumeration or other reasons. Nor do they establish the extent of such problems across Punjab. However, they provide examples of electors publicly reporting difficulties with identification, enumeration, BLO assistance and entries in the draft electoral roll.

The complaints are relevant to the SIR process because the exercise involves the verification of existing electors and preparation of the draft electoral roll. Errors in recording a voter’s status, difficulties in locating an EPIC number or problems in accessing BLO assistance can potentially affect an elector’s ability to verify their entry and raise a claim or objection within the prescribed period.

Claims and objections open until September 12

With the draft roll now published, voters have an opportunity to verify their names and particulars and seek corrections or inclusion where required.

Those whose names are missing can file claims along with the prescribed declaration and supporting documents until September 12. Electors can also use the prescribed forms to seek deletion of an ineligible entry, correction of details or shifting of their registration.

The process therefore moves into a crucial claims and objections stage, particularly for the more than 20 lakh electors who were not covered through collection and digitisation of enumeration forms. The final electoral roll will be prepared after the claims and objections received during this period are processed by the election authorities.

Related:

Punjab University’s former dean writes to CJI: Bihar SIR threatens democracy, alleges ECI overreach & voter disenfranchisement

Non-Electors within Electors: ECI reports over 61 lakh potential exclusions

Bihar’s untraceable electors spiral by 809% in just one day, ECI reports 1 lakh ‘missing’, 15 lakh Bihar voters yet to submit forms

SC: ECI’s ‘wisdom’ on revision of electoral rolls challenged, does a disenfranchisement crisis loom over Bihar, with thousands being declared ‘‘D’ (doubtful) voters?

The post Punjab SIR draft roll published; 20 lakh electors marked ASDD, claims open till September 12 appeared first on SabrangIndia.