Responding to this, the PUCL in a detailed statement has outlined how, the views encapsulated in paragraphs 185-188 seek to delegitimize the work of Human Rights organisations around legal aid, fact finding visits and monetary aid. These are vital Constitutional tools that independent organizations use to establish facts, fix accountability and ensure succour for victims of communal strife. By casting aspersions on organisations, the hon’ble court is taking recourse to the baseless narrative of “anti-national” interests working against the State.

This statement by the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) provides a comprehensive response to the observations made by the Special NIA Court, Lucknow; against the PUCL and other Human Rights organisations. (FIR 60/2018; Case numbers 1049/2022, 1758/2022 and 2766/2022)/ The statement has been issued by President, PUCL, Kavita Srivastava and V Suresh, General Secretary.

The contentious points in paras 185 to 188 of the judgement delivered in January 4, 2025 are as follows:

• The court observed that ‘the Prosecutors have expressed concern that in NIA courts across the country, when accused in cases under the UAPA or other anti-national/terrorist activities are brought for trial, NGOs—primarily advocating Muslim interests—promptly provide legal aid. This contradicts constitutional principles, as it boosts the morale of undesirable elements.’

• The Court went on to observe that human rights reports by written by various NGOs like Alliance for Justice and Accountability (New York), Citizens for Justice and Peace (Mumbai), Indian American Muslim council, Washington DC, People’s Union for Civil Liberties (New Delhi), Rihaee Manch (Lucknow), South Asia Solidarity group, London and United Against Hate (New Delhi), ‘exert undue pressure on the judiciary and the communal sentiment with stealth creep into the realm of ideas.’

• The Court went on to castigate ‘lawyers from NGOs’ for representing cases of national security, terrorism etc.’ Shocking the Court violates the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court by stating that it’ is not the right of an NGO to provide free legal aid to the accused who are involved in heinous crimes’… NGOS providing legal aid and lawyers is resulting in promoting a point of view which is very narrow and dangerous.’

• The Court concluded that, ‘Citizens for justice and Peace, Mumbai, People’s Union for Civil Liberties, (New Delhi), Rihaee Manch, (Lucknow), United Against Hate (New Delhi), along with NGOs located abroad, like in America and the Great Britian, like the Alliance for Justice and Accountability, New York, Indian American council, Washington, DC), South Asia Solidarity Group (London), were “bogus”, not legitimate human rights organisations. As the Court put it, what could be their interests? Where is their funding coming from, and what are their collective objectives? To investigate this, prevent their unwarranted interference in the judicial process, and to take necessary action to stop them, a copy of this decision should also be sent to the Chairman of the Bar Council of India and the Principal Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India”.

 The PUCL in their statement thereafter states as follows

1. Courts should not make adverse remarks against individuals or groups without giving them an opportunity of being heard: Supreme Court of India

Firstly, it should be noted that, none of the implicated organisations were before the Court or were put to notice that observations were likely to be made against them. The Supreme Court has laid down time and again that Courts should not make adverse remarks against individuals or groups without giving them an opportunity of being heard.

In the case of Teesta Setalvad V. State of Gujarat (2004) 10 SCC 88) Supreme Court observed that: “Time and again the supreme Court has deprecated the practice of making observations in Judgments, unless the person in respect of whom comments and criticisms were being made were parties to the proceedings and further were granted opportunity of having their say in the matter, unmindful of the serious repercussions they may entail on such persons. ……Observations should not be made by Courts against persons and authorities unless they are necessary or essential for decision of the case.”

The PUCL has stated that, “We are shocked to note that the ruling has passed prejudiced, unsubstantiated and potentially damaging comments about the role of human rights organisations in general and PUCL in particular, when these comments are not germane to the issues in the criminal trial nor were they based on evidence led during the trial. Apart from the fact that these comments are in the nature of an obiter dicta, the fact that such comments have been incorporated into the ruling in a criminal case, which is bound strictly to the facts on record which have been tested during cross-examination and trial, raises doubts about fairness and impartiality in delivering justice in the specific criminal case.

Further the detailed statement issued by the human rights platform founded by Jayprakash Narayan states that, “It should be pointed out that third parties to the criminal trial don’t have any role or scope to intervene in specific criminal cases. Thus, while parties to the criminal case have the option of filing appeals in higher courts both to challenge the verdict of the trial court and also to challenge comments made in the trial court’s judgment, such is not the case with third parties.”

Besides the PUCL statement makes the following points:

2. Conducting Fact Finding, not unconstitutional or unlawful

Secondly, the incident pertains to communal violence which happened in Kasganj in U.P. in 2018. UP has been a hotbed of growing communal tension and violence since even before the Ram Mandir Agitation that led to the demolition of the Babri Masjid. There have been allegations against the State authorities and the police of helping, provoking, aiding and abetting, communal tension more particularly targeting the minority religious communities. A biased narrative is built up by the authorities invariably blaming the minority community for any violence and then engaged in targeted arrests. It is in this context that it is vital that every such conflagration be investigated by independent civil society organisations to bring forth the true facts. PUCL has been involved in large number of fact findings throughout the country irrespective of the party in power and its fact findings have great credibility. In any case, fact finding, giving legal aid to accused and victims or even providing financial aid to accused or victims can by no stretch of imagination be considered as anti-national activity as sought to be conveyed by the Court. Campaigning on issues, bringing out an alternative viewpoint and public discussion are essential work of civil society organisations, an exercise of constitutional freedom and a key contribution to the idea of an associative democracy.

3. Promoting by peaceful means civil liberties, harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood, agenda of the PUCL 

Thirdly, it should be noted, that even when it comes to the present case as regards PUCL the only action it had taken pursuant to the violence was to act according to the objects of the PUCL Constitution which has as its aim and objects, ‘To uphold and promote by peaceful means civil liberties and the democratic way of life throughout India’

The visit to Kasganj was in pursuance of this object. The aim of the visit is to take forward the fundamental duty enjoined upon all citizens under Art 51(e) which is ‘to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of India transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional diversities.’ As such, the PUCL has only acted in accordance with the values of the Indian Constitution and such actions do not merit such prejudicial judicial comments.

The judicial censure seeks to mark and target citizens for forming organisations exercising their right under Art 19(1) (c) and getting together and putting forward a collective voice in defence of the ideals envisaged in the Constitution! As Babasaheb Ambedkar put it, ‘constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment. It has to be cultivated’. The PUCL activities under its Constitution, aims to cultivate the constitutional morality embodied in the principle of ‘harmony’ and the ‘spirit of brotherhood’. This we submit is the responsibility of the state as well as members of civil society.

The UN Declaration on human rights defenders has also unequivocally recognised that, ‘Everyone has the right, individually and in association with others, to promote and to strive for the protection and realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms at the national and international levels.’

4. The Public Interest work of the PUCL, through Public Interest Litigation (PILs) in the HC and SC strengthened the basic rights of citizens.

The fact that the PUCL has been a petitioner before both the Supreme Court and High Courts in numerous cases highlights the constitutional work of the PUCL and further exposes the unwarranted and prejudicial nature of the judicial observations. A number of judgments of the Supreme Court which ensure basic rights for citizens including the right to food, freedom from bonded labour and liberation of persons in manual scavenging have had the PUCL as the petitioner. PUCL has also worked towards enhancing the quality of our electoral democracy and has been the petitioner in the Supreme Court decisions recognizing NOTA as a valid option. The PUCL is also the petitioner in the decision of the Supreme Court recognizing that the voter has a right to know the antecedents of their candidate including the assets he or she possesses as well as criminal antecedents.

5. Facts overlooked by the Court 

Fourthly, the judicial comments also violate the judicial discipline of basing conclusions on facts which form part of the record. It should be noted that in terms of ‘facts’,

PUCL did not prepare a fact-finding report, nor did it provide any financial or legal support to families and accused. Though PUCL has in effect done none of the above, we strongly assert that conducting a fact finding is not a crime, providing financial or legal support to families and accused is a humanitarian task and completely within the bounds of the Constitutions.

It is also important for all to know that the PUCL is an unregistered citizens organization and gets no Institutional funding, foreign or Indian and works through contributions of its members and well-wishers and therefore the allegations of funding are baseless.”

Finally, the detailed statements sum up that the stated observations by the NIA court are a) lacking in factual substance; b) attack the credibility of human rights work and c) seek to actively discourage perspectives rooted in the Constitution which seek to expose the state for not abiding by the Constitution. “In the interests of fidelity to the constitutional values of freedom of speech, expression and association, and in the interests of truth and reason, we hope that these prejudiced and invidious observations are suo moto deleted from the reported judgment. “

Related:

Convictions in Kasganj communal riots by NIA Special Court

The post Targeting human rights activism: comments by NIA Court shocking: PUCL appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Violent upheavals including intra-community violence, even targeted pogroms have also witnessed this issue raising its head. The surge in not just identity politics but a majoritarian slant in wings of the Indian state have seen this visual manifestation –police jeeps and police stations with idols and or temples within, government offices observing religious ceremonies. Even court premises have not been immune to this trend.

What have India’s constitutional courts said on the issue? Has there been a consensus and unequivocal upholding of non-partisan neutrality? This legal resource examines the jurisprudence around this question.

In the case of Noorul Islam Samskarika Sangam Thottekkad v. District Collector, Malappuram, [2022 (5) KHC 595], the Kerala High Court emphasised this perspective, adding that “religion is the creator of religious places,” a timely reflection on the growing issue of illegal encroachments on government land. Further reinforcing this, the Court in Balakrishna Pillai v. Union of India, [2021 (4) KHC 282], beautifully articulated, “The God almighty is omnipresent… for the development of the National Highway, if the religious institutions are affected, God will forgive us. God will protect the petitioners, the authorities, and also the author of this judgment. God will be with us.” These cases is a reminder of the need to preserve public spaces for the common good, free from religious encroachments that threaten secular harmony.

Beyond encroachments, there is also the issue of maintaining the secular nature of the state by ensuring that religious activities do not take place within state-maintained institutions like police stations, government offices, or other public service entities.

No illegal religious construction on government land: Kerala High Court

On May 27, 2024, the Kerala High Court delivered a significant judgment emphasising the need to preserve religious harmony by preventing the construction of illegal religious structures on government land. Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan, in his ruling, asserted that the construction of such structures, irrespective of religious affiliation—whether Hindu, Muslim, Christian, or any other—would not be permitted as it could lead to religious disharmony in the state. The Court highlighted the importance of the Preamble of the Indian Constitution, specifically the principle of a secular state, and noted that while religious freedom is a fundamental right, it does not extend to the encroachment of public land for religious purposes.

Justice Kunhikrishnan stressed Kerala’s unique position as a “God’s Own Country” with a high population density and a diverse religious landscape. The Court expressed concern that allowing religious structures to be erected on government land could spark disputes and law-and-order problems. He further pointed out that the government is focused on distributing land to landless individuals, and such land cannot be misused for religious purposes. By emphasising the need for communal harmony, the Court directed the identification and removal of unauthorised religious structures on government property, reinforcing the secular ideals enshrined in India’s Constitution.

The Judgement of Kerala High Court dated 27.05.2024 can be read here:

MP HC seeks list of temples and other religious structures within police stations

On December 16, 2024 the Jabalpur bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court directed the state government to provide a detailed list of temples and other religious structures built within police station premises across the state. Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait, who presided over the hearing, ordered the government to submit the requested information within seven days. The court also sought details on the dates these structures were constructed and the specific orders under which they were established.

The petition, filed by advocate Satish Chandra Verma, challenges the legality of religious structures within police stations, arguing that such constructions violate the secular principles enshrined in the Indian Constitution. The court expressed dissatisfaction with the government’s vague response and made it clear that only precise and factual information would be accepted. It also emphasized the need for detailed records, including the legal legitimacy and orders authorizing the construction of these religious sites.

The petition contends that these constructions violate both Article 14 (Right to Equality) and Article 25 (Right to Freedom of Religion) of the Constitution. The petitioner argues that using state property for religious purposes undermines India’s secular framework. The next hearing is scheduled for January 6, 2025, by which time the government directed to present all relevant documents. Advocate Verma remarked, “This issue challenges the core principles of the Constitution, and we hope the High Court will take decisive action.” As per a report in Live Law.

The order of MP High Court dated 16.12.2024 can be read here:

The issue raised in the petition is of significant constitutional importance, as it challenges the presence of religious structures within police station premises, questioning their alignment with India’s secular principles. The Madhya Pradesh High Court’s scrutiny highlights concerns over the use of state property for religious purposes, potentially undermining the secular nature of the state, as guaranteed by the Constitution. This case touches on the delicate balance between religious freedom and the state’s duty to maintain neutrality. It also raises questions about the potential violation of citizens’ right to equality and freedom of religion under Articles 14 and 25.

MP High Court temporarily stops temple construction in police stations

On November 4, 2024, the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s principal bench in Jabalpur also issued a significant directive banning the construction of temples on police station premises, igniting a debate on religious structures within state institutions. Led by Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kaith, the bench issued notices to senior state officials, including Chief Secretary Anurag Jain, Director General of Police Sudhir Saxena, and the Jabalpur district administration, seeking explanations on how religious structures were being erected on government property. This practice potentially contradicted the secular framework of the Indian Constitution. Notices were also sent to the Home Department, Urban Administration Department, and the Station House Officers (SHOs) of four Jabalpur police stations—Civil Lines, Vijay Nagar, Madan Mahal, and Lord Ganj—where temples stood.

The order of MP High Court 04.11.2024 can be read here:

In 2006, Gujarat High Court ordered removal of religious structures upon public spaces

In year 2006, the Gujarat High Court, prompted by a news report in The Times of India (Ahmedabad Edition, May 2, 2006), which revealed that 1,200 temples and 260 Islamic shrines had encroached upon public spaces, took suo moto action. The High Court on May 2, 2006, issued an interim order directing the Gujarat government to take immediate steps to remove religious structures from public spaces without discrimination and to submit a report on the progress.

In response, the Union of India appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the interim direction issued by the Gujarat High Court resembled a final order, which could only be made after hearing all parties involved. The Supreme Court stayed the implementation of the Gujarat High Court’s order on May 4, 2006. Subsequently, the Additional Solicitor General (ASG) informed the Supreme Court that the central government, after consulting with the concerned state secretaries, would seek a consensual approach to address similar issues nationwide and requested time to do so.

The matter returned to the Supreme Court on July 31, 2009, when ASG Gopal Subramanian filed an affidavit. He stated that no religious structures—whether temples, churches, mosques, or gurudwaras—would be allowed on public streets or public spaces.

However, this matter is yet to be decided by the Gujarat High Court’s division bench, and is listed for January 2, 2025 for hearing.

Home Secretary informed the Union that no such construction is permitted

Notably, during the hearing of this case before the Supreme Court, the then Solicitor General of India, Gopal Subramanian submitted letters dated September 19 and September 23, 2009, from the Home Secretary, which were addressed directly to the Solicitor General of India. The content of letter reads as under:

“I had taken a meeting with the Chief Secretaries of the States on 17.09.2009 with a view to evolve consensus on the problem of encroachment of public spaces by religious structures. I am glad to report that after the meeting, the following consensus emerged: –

• No unauthorised construction of any religious institution namely, temple, church, mosque or gurudwara, etc. shall be permitted on public street/public space. 

• (ii) In respect of unauthorised constructions of any religious nature which has taken place in the past, the State Governments would review the same on a case by case basis and take appropriate steps. This will be done as expeditiously as possible.”

When the Supreme Court says ‘no’ to religious structure within public spaces

The matter initially revolved around the issue of illegal religious structures encroaching upon public spaces in Gujarat. However, recognising the far-reaching implications and potential consequences of the case, the Supreme Court took a significant step and impleaded all states and Union Territories as respondents in the petition. The Registry was directed to issue notices to all states and Union Territories within three days. Additionally, the Union of India was instructed to supply the entire set of papers to all standing counsel representing state governments and Union Territories.

Subsequently, on September 29, 2009, the division bench of the Supreme Court, consisting of Justices Dalveer Bhandari and Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, issued an important directive. The Court ordered that state governments and Union Territories review existing unauthorised religious constructions on a case-by-case basis and take prompt action to resolve the issue. Furthermore, as an interim measure, the Court mandated that “no unauthorised construction shall be carried out or permitted in the name of a Temple, Church, Mosque, or Gurudwara on public streets, public parks, or other public places.”

The order of Supreme Court dated 29.09.2009 can be read here:

Is encroachment in the name of religion not questionable?

Encroachment in the name of religion is a contentious issue because it raises fundamental questions about the role of the state in regulating public spaces and maintaining a secular environment. While religious freedom is guaranteed by the Constitution, it is crucial to ask whether encroaching upon public spaces for religious purposes is justified. The state, as the custodian of public order, has the constitutional duty to ensure that its institutions remain separate from religious or worship activities. This separation is key to maintaining a secular state, where public resources and spaces should not be monopolized by any religious activity.

The question arises: should religious activities be allowed to take over public spaces that are meant for the common use of all citizens? If religious structures are permitted to encroach upon public land, it undermines the principle of equal access to space for all citizens, regardless of their beliefs. Furthermore, it puts the state in the precarious position of endorsing religious activities in a way that may conflict with its duty to maintain neutrality and equal treatment for all religions. The state must ensure that public spaces remain accessible, inclusive, and free from religious encroachment.

When Rajasthan ADJ bans temple construction on police station premises

Rajasthan’s Additional Director General of Police (Police Housing), A. Ponnuchami, issued a directive on October 25, 2021, prohibiting the construction of temples within police stations and their surrounding areas. This move was aims to uphold the religious neutrality of state institutions and prevent religious encroachment in public space

Ponnuchami highlighted that over the years, various police departments had constructed religious places of worship, violating the Rajasthan Religious Buildings and Public Places Act of 1954. Under this law, religious structures cannot be built in public spaces, including government buildings and parks, without approval from the District Collector and local authorities. The directive was seen as a necessary step to restore adherence to the law and maintain the neutrality of public institutions.

Rajasthan High Court dismissed the PIL against ADJ order banning temple construction

Subsequently, the order faced legal challenge in the Rajasthan High Court. On November 11, 2021, the Rajasthan High Court dismissed a petition challenging the state police’s decision to prohibit the construction of shrines within government premises. The petition, filed by Pooja Gurnani, argued that the police’s circular interfered with religious beliefs by barring religious structures in public spaces. The circular was issued in line with the Rajasthan Religious Buildings and Public Places Act, 1954, which mandates that places of worship cannot be built in public areas, including government buildings and parks, without approval from the District Collector and local authorities.

The Court, led by Chief Justice Akil Kureshi and Justice Rekha Borana, referenced the October 25 circular in its ruling. The bench emphasized that the circular merely called for strict adherence to the 1954 Act, urging authorities to enforce its provisions. The court noted that there was no legitimate grievance from the petitioner since the circular aimed at ensuring compliance with the law.

Additionally, the court dismissed Gurnani’s request to exempt government buildings and police stations from being classified as “public places” under the 1954 Act. Justice Kureshi clarified that the court could not direct the legislature to amend laws in any specific way.

The order of Rajasthan High Court dated 11.11.2021 can be read here:

J&K High Court also issued directive on illegal religious encroachments

On September 3, 2020, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court also took significant action concerning illegal religious structures encroaching on public land. The court, led by the then Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice Puneet Gupta, directed the Divisional Commissioner of Jammu, Kashmir, and Ladakh to gather detailed reports from all Deputy Commissioners regarding such encroachments. These encroachments were primarily on public spaces, including streets, parks, and other public areas. The directive aimed to ensure that authorities take immediate and comprehensive action on this issue.

Focus on detailed reports and timely action

The court, referencing previous Supreme Court order in Times of India (Suo Moto) 2006, on similar matters, insisted that the Divisional Commissioner obtain reports under specific headings: the location of the encroachments, the area covered, and the identity of the encroachers. This step was part of an effort to identify and address the widespread issue of unauthorized religious structures occupying valuable public land. The court ordered that these reports be compiled and submitted within six weeks. Additionally, it directed that the information be reviewed by the Chief Secretaries of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh to ensure that a suitable policy decision was made.

The order of J&K High Cour dated 03.09.2020 can be read here:

The issue of religious neutrality in the functioning of state-maintained public premises and offices is a crucial aspect of upholding the secular framework of a nation. In India, the Constitution mandates that the state shall not support or favour any religion, and it must remain neutral in matters of religious practice and beliefs. This principle is reflected in various judicial rulings and actions taken to prevent religious encroachments on government land and public spaces, as well as the maintenance of secularism within state-run institutions.

Secularism and public spaces: addressing the challenge of religious encroachments

The balance between religious freedom and the state’s obligation to maintain secularism has been a recurring theme in India’s legal landscape. The issue of religious structures on public spaces, particularly government-owned land, has sparked debates about the limits of religious expression and the importance of preserving secularism. The Kerala High Court’s recent ruling in Noorul Islam Samskarika Sangam Thottekkad v. District Collector, Malappuram (2022) reinforces this by underlining the state’s duty to maintain public spaces free from unauthorised religious structures. This principle is enshrined in the Indian Constitution, which mandates a secular state where no religion receives preferential treatment.

The misuse of government land for religious purposes

One of the most contentious issues in this debate is the construction of religious structures on government land. As Kerala High Court Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan stated, religious structures—whether Hindu, Muslim, Christian, or others—cannot be allowed on public land. This was echoed in the court’s decision to remove unauthorized religious encroachments from government properties, highlighting that the state cannot permit the misuse of public resources for religious activities. This ruling stressed the importance of secularism in ensuring that no religious structure dominates public spaces, thus fostering harmony among different communities.

The Court’s reasoning in cases such as Balakrishna Pillai v. Union of India (2021), where the need for a secular state was emphasized, reflects the broader societal concern that allowing religious encroachments on government land could lead to religious disharmony. The constitutional commitment to secularism mandates that public spaces remain neutral, ensuring equal access for all citizens, regardless of their religious affiliations.

The role of state institutions in upholding secularism

State institutions, including police stations and government offices, are meant to remain neutral in matters of religion. The public manifestation of this neutrality is a space and authority free from religious symbolism. The presence of religious structures within such institutions challenges this neutrality, as highlighted by the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s ongoing scrutiny of religious constructions within police stations. In a recent directive, the MP High Court asked the state government to provide detailed information about these religious structures, pointing out that the construction of temples or other places of worship in government-run institutions could undermine the secular fabric of the state. The challenge raised in this case is of constitutional significance, questioning whether such religious structures violate the principles of Articles 14 (Right to Equality) and 25 (Right to Freedom of Religion) of the Indian Constitution.

Similar concerns were raised by Rajasthan’s Additional Director General of Police, who prohibited the construction of temples within police stations to uphold the secular nature of state institutions. This directive was in line with the Rajasthan Religious Buildings and Public Places Act, 1954, which prohibits religious structures on public land without prior approval from authorities.

The constitutional mandate: religious neutrality of public spaces

Religious neutrality is a fundamental tenet of India’s Constitution, which forbids the state from endorsing any religious activity in its institutions. This principle is reinforced by judicial rulings that prohibit the encroachment of public spaces for religious purposes. For instance, the Gujarat High Court, as early as 2006, ordered the removal of thousands of religious structures from public spaces, reaffirming the constitutional requirement for secularism. The Supreme Court, too, directed those unauthorized religious constructions be reviewed upon public spaces nationwide, underscoring that no religious structure should be allowed to occupy public land.

A unified approach: the need for policy and enforcement

The rise in unauthorised religious structures underscores the importance of strict enforcement of laws to maintain secularism and the effective use of public spaces. It is essential that all levels of government—from the local to the national—take consistent action in preventing the encroachment of religious structures on government land. The actions taken by various High Courts, such as the Kerala and Madhya Pradesh High Courts, highlight the need for a clear and cohesive policy that addresses both existing and future encroachments, ensuring that public spaces are preserved for the collective benefit of all citizens, irrespective of their religious beliefs.

However, while religious freedom remains a cherished right in India, the construction of religious structures on government land is a misuse of public property that undermines the secular nature of the state. Judicial rulings, including those from the Kerala and Madhya Pradesh High Courts, serve as important reminders of the need for vigilance in upholding constitutional values of secularism and ensuring that public spaces remain accessible to all. The state’s duty is to protect these spaces from religious encroachments, fostering a society that values harmony, equality, and religious neutrality.

Related:

MP: High Court temporarily stops temple construction in police stations, questions legality on government land

Rajasthan HC endorses police order to bar worship areas on gov’t premises

Rajasthan ADG bans temple construction on police station premises 

The post Religious structures inside the public institution are invalid, what the constitutional courts say appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On January 3, 1831, 176 years ago Savitribai Phule, arguably India’s first woman teacher and forgotten liberator was born. With the first school for girls from different castes that she set up in Bhidewada, Pune (the seat of Brahmanism) Krantijyoti Savitribai as she is reverentially known, by the Indian Bahujan movement, blazed a revolutionary trial. There have been consistent demands to observe January 3 as Teachers Day. Without her, Indian women would not have had the benefits of education.

To mark the memory of this remarkable woman we bring to you her letters to life partner Jyotiba. Jyotiba and Savitribai were Comrades in Arms in their struggle against the emancipation of India’s disenfranchised people.

Translated from the Original Marathi with an introduction Sunil Sardar Reproduced here are the English translation of three important Letters – (originally in Marathi and published in MG Mali’s edition of her collected works, Savitribai Phule Samagra Wangmaya) – that Savitribai wrote to her husband Jyotiba in a span of 20 years.

The letters are significant as they write of the wider concerns that drove this couple, the emancipation of the most deprived segments of society and the struggle to attain for them, full human dignity and freedom.

This vision for a new and liberated society – free from ignorance, bigotry, deprivation, and hunger – was the thread that bonded the couple, arching from the private to the personal.

Theirs was a relationship of deep and shared concerns, each providing strength to the other. When large sections of 19^th century Maharashtrian society was ranged against Phule’s reconstructive radicalism, it was the unfailing and shared vision and dedication of his life partner that needs have been emotionally sustaining.  In our tribute to this couple and the tradition of radical questioning that they harboured, we bring to our readers these letters.

1856. The first letter, written in 1856, speaks about the core issue: education and its transformative possibilities in a society where learning, had for centuries been the monopoly of the Brahmins; who, in turn, used this exclusive privilege to enclave, demoralize and oppress. Away at her parental home to recuperate from an illness, Savitri describes in the letter a conversation with her brother, who is uncomfortable with the couple’s radicalism.

October 1856
The Embodiment of Truth, My Lord Jyotiba,
Savitri salutes you!

After so many vicissitudes, now it seems my health has been fully restored. My brother worked so hard and nursed me so well through my sickness. His service and devotion shows how loving he really is! I will come to Pune as soon as I get perfectly well. Please do not worry about me. I know my absence causes Fatima so much trouble but I am sure she will understand and won’t grumble.

As we were talking one day, my brother said, “You and your husband have rightly been excommunicated because both of you serve the untouchables (Mahars and Mangs). The untouchables are fallen people and by helping them you are bringing a bad name to our family. That is why, I tell you to behave according to the customs of our caste and obey the dictates of the Brahmans.” Mother was so disturbed by this brash talk of my brother.

Though my brother is a good soul he is extremely narrow-minded and so he did not hesitate to bitterly criticize and reproach us. My mother did not reprimand him but tried instead to bring him to his senses, “God has given you a beautiful tongue but it is no good to misuse it so!” I defended our social work and tried to dispel his misgivings. I told him, “Brother, your mind is narrow, and the Brahmans’ teaching has made it worse. Animals like goats and cows are not untouchable for you, you lovingly touch them. You catch poisonous snakes on the day of the snake-festival and feed them milk. But you consider Mahars and Mangs, who are as human as you and I, untouchables. Can you give me any reason for this? When the Brahmans perform their religious duties in their holy clothes, they consider you also impure and untouchable, they are afraid that your touch will pollute them. They don’t treat you differently than the Mahars.” When my brother heard this, he turned red in the face, but then he asked me, “Why do you teach those Mahars and Mangs? People abuse you because you teach the untouchables. I cannot bear it when people abuse and create trouble for you for doing that. I cannot tolerate such insults.” I told him what the (teaching of) English had been doing for the people. I said, “The lack of learning is nothing but gross bestiality. It is through the acquisition of knowledge that (he) loses his lower status and achieves the higher one. My husband is a god-like man. He is beyond comparison in this world, nobody can equal him. He thinks the Untouchables must learn and attain freedom. He confronts the Brahmans and fights with them to ensure Teaching and Learning for the Untouchables because he believes that they are human beings like other and they should live as dignified humans. For this they must be educated. I also teach them for the same reason. What is wrong with that? Yes, we both teach girls, women, Mangs and Mahars. The Brahmans are upset because they believe this will create problems for them. That is why they oppose us and chant the mantra that it is against our religion. They revile and castigate us and poison the minds of even good people like you.

“You surely remember that the British Government had organised a function to honour my husband for his great work. His felicitation caused these vile people much heartburn. Let me tell you that my husband does not merely invoke God’s name and participate in pilgrimages like you. He is actually doing God’s own work. And I assist him in that. I enjoy doing this work. I get immeasurable joy by doing such service. Moreover, it also shows the heights and horizons to which a human being can reach out.”

Mother and brother were listening to me intently. My brother finally came around, repented for what he had said and asked for forgiveness. Mother said, “Savitri, your tongue must be speaking God’s own words. We are blessed by your words of wisdom.” Such appreciation from my mother and brother gladdened my heart. From this you can imagine that there are many idiots here, as in Pune, who poison people’s minds and spread canards against us. But why should we fear them and leave this noble cause that we have undertaken? It would be better to engage with the work instead. We shall overcome and success will be ours in the future. The future belongs to us.

What more could I write?

With humble regards,

Yours,

Savitri

The Poetess in Savitribai

The year 1854 was important as Savitribai published her collection of poems, called Kabya Phule (Poetry’s Blossoms).
Bavan Kashi Subodh Ratnakar (The Ocean of Pure Gems), another collection of what has come to be highly regarded in the world of Marathi poetry was published in 1891. (The Phules had developed a devastating critique of the Brahman interpretation of Marathi history in the ancient and medieval periods. He portrayed the Peshwa rulers, later overthrown by the British, as decadent and oppressive, and Savitribai reiterates those themes in her biography.)
Apart from these two collections, four of Jyotiba’s speeches on Indian History were edited for publication by Savitribai. A few of her own speeches were also published in 1892. Savitribai’s correspondence is also remarkable because they give us an insight into her own life and into the life and lived experiences of women of the time.

1868. The Second letter is about a great social taboo – a love affair between a Brahman boy and an Untouchable girl; the cruel behavior of the ‘enraged’ villagers and how Savitribai stepped in. This intervention saves the lives of the lovers and she sends them away to the safety and caring support of her husband, Jyotiba. With the malevolent reality of honour killings in the India of 2016 and the hate-driven propaganda around ‘love jehad’ this letter is ever so relevant today.

29 August 1868
Naigaon, Peta Khandala
Satara
The Embodiment of Truth, My Lord Jotiba,
Savitri salutes you!
I received your letter. We are fine here. I will come by the fifth of next month. Do not worry on this count. Meanwhile, a strange thing happened here. The story goes like this. One Ganesh, a Brahman, would go around villages, performing religious rites and telling people their fortunes. This was his bread and butter. Ganesh and a teenage girl named Sharja who is from the Mahar (untouchable) community fell in love. She was six months pregnant when people came to know about this affair. The enraged people caught them, and paraded them through the village, threatening to bump them off.

I came to know about their murderous plan. I rushed to the spot and scared them away, pointing out the grave consequences of killing the lovers under the British law. They changed their mind after listening to me.

Sadubhau angrily said that the wily Brahman boy and the untouchable girl should leave the village. Both the victims agreed to this. My intervention saved the couple who gratefully fell at my feet and started crying. Somehow I consoled and pacified them. Now I am sending both of them to you. What else to write?
Yours
Savitri

1877. The last letter, written in 1877, is a heart-rending account of a famine that devastated western Maharashtra. People and animals were dying. Savitri and other Satyashodhak volunteers were doing their best to help. The letter brings out an intrepid Savitri leading a team of dedicated Satyashodhaks striving to overcome a further exacerbation of the tragedy by moneylenders’ trying to benefit.  She meets the local District administration. The letter ends on a poignant note where Savitribai reiterates her total commitment to her the humanitarian work pioneered by the Phules.

20 April, 1877
Otur, Junner
The Embodiment of Truth, My Lord Jyotiba,
Savitri salutes you!
The year 1876 has gone, but the famine has not – it stays in most horrendous forms here. The people are dying. The animals are dying, falling on the ground. There is severe scarcity of food. No fodder for animals. The people are forced to leave their villages. Some are selling their children, their young girls, and leaving the villages. Rivers, brooks and tanks have completely dried up – no water to drink. Trees are dying – no leaves on trees. Barren land is cracked everywhere. The sun is scorching – blistering. The people crying for food and water are falling on the ground to die. Some are eating poisonous fruits, and drinking their own urine to quench their thirst. They cry for food and drink, and then they die.

Our Satyashodhak volunteers have formed committees to provide food and other life-saving material to the people in need. They have formed relief squads.
Brother Kondaj and his wife Umabai are taking good care of me. Otur’s Shastri, Ganapati Sakharan, Dumbare Patil, and others are planning to visit you. It would be better if you come from Satara to Otur and then go to Ahmednagar.

You may remember R.B. Krishnaji Pant and Laxman Shastri. They travelled with me to the affected area and gave some monetary help to the victims.

The moneylenders are viciously exploiting the situation. Bad things are taking place as a result of this famine. Riots are breaking out. The Collector heard of this and came to ease the situation. He deployed the white police officers, and tried to bring the situation under control. Fifty Satyasholdhaks were rounded up. The Collector invited me for a talk. I asked the Collector why the good volunteers had been framed with false charges and arrested without any rhyme or reason. I asked him to release them immediately. The Collector was quite decent and unbiased. He shouted at the white soldiers, “Do the Patil farmers rob? Set them free.” The Collector was moved by the people’s plights. He immediately sent four bullock cartloads of (jowar) food.

You have started the benevolent and welfare work for the poor and the needy. I also want to carry my share of the responsibility. I assure you I will always help you. I wish the godly work will be helped by more people.

I do not want to write more.
Yours,
Savitri

(These letters have been excerpted with grateful thanks from A Forgotten Liberator, The Life and Struggle of Savitrabai Phule, Edited by Braj Ranjan Mani, Pamela Sardar)

Bibliography:

Krantijyoti : Revolutionary flame
Brahmans: Priestly “upper” caste with a powerful hold on all fairs of society and state including access to education, resources and mobility (spelt interchangeably as Brahmins)
Mahars:The Mahar is an Indian Caste, found largely in the state of Maharashtra, where they compromise 10% of the population, and neighboring areas. Most of the Mahar community followed social reformer B. R. Ambedkar in converting to Buddhism in the middle of the 20th century.
Mangs: The Mang (or Matang -Minimadig in Gujarat and Rajasthan) community is an Indian caste historically associated with low-status or ritually impure professions such as village musicians, cattle castraters, leather curers, midwives, hangmen, undertakers. Today they are listed as a Scheduled Castes a term which has replaced the former the derogatory ‘Untouchable’
Satyashodhak Samaj:  A society established by Jyotirao Phule on September 24, 1873. This was started as a group whose main aim was to liberate the shudra and untouchable castes from exploitation and oppression
Shudra: The fourth caste under the rigid caste Hindu system; these were further made more rigid in the Manu Smruti
Ati Shudra: Most of the groups listed under this category come under the untouchables who were used for the most venal tasks in caste ridden Hindu society but not treated as part of the caste system.
Jowar: The Indian name for sorghum

How the Education for girls was pioneered

The Phule couple decided to start schools for girls, especially from the shudra and atishudra castes but also including others so that social cohesion of sorts could be attempted in the classroom. Bhidewada in Pune was the chosen site, a bank stands there today. There is a movement among Bahujans to reclaim this historic building. When the Phules faced stiff resistance and a boycott, a Pune-based businessman Usman Shaikh gave them shelter. Fatima Shaikh Usman’s sister was the first teacher colleague of Savitribai and the two trained teachers who ran the school. The school started with nine girl students in 1848.

Sadashiv Govande contributed books from Ahmednagar. It functioned for about six months and then had to be closed down. Another building was found and the school reopened a few months later. The young couple faced severe opposition from almost all sections. Savitribai was subject to intense harassment everyday as she walked to school. Stones, mud and dirt were flung at her as she passed. She was often abused by groups of men with orthodox beliefs who opposed the education for women. Filth including cow dung was flung on her. Phule gave her hope, love and encouragement. She went to school wearing an old sari, and carried an extra sari with her to change into after she reached the school. The sheer daring and doggedness of the couple and their comrades in arms broke the resistance. Finally, the pressure on her eased when she was compelled to slap one of her tormentors on the street!

Once the caste Hindu Brahmanical hierarchy who were the main opponents of female education realized that the Phule couple would not easily give in, they arm-twisted Jyotiba’s father. Intense pressure was brought by the Brahmins on Phule’s father, Govindrao, to convince him that his son was on the wrong track, that what he was doing was against the Dharma. Finally, things came to a head when Phule’s father told him to leave home in 1849. Savitri preferred to stay by her husband’s side, braving the opposition and difficulties, and encouraging Phule to continue their educational work.

However, their pioneering move had won some support. Necessities like books were supplied through well wishers; a bigger house, owned by a Muslim, was found for a second school which was started in 1851. Moro Vithal Walvekar and Deorao Thosar assisted the school. Major Candy, an educationalist of Pune, sent books. Jyotirao worked here without any salary and later Savitribai was put in charge. The school committee, in a report, noted, “The state of the school funds has compelled the committee to appoint teachers on small salaries, who soon give up when they find better appointment…Savitribai, the school headmistress, has nobly volunteered to devote herself to the improvement of female education without remuneration. We hope that as knowledge advances, the people of this country will be awakened to the advantages of female education and will cordially assist in all such plans calculated to improve the conditions of those girls.”

On November 16, 1852, the education department of the government organised a public felicitation of the Phule couple, where they were honoured with shawls.
On February 12, 1853, the school was publicly examined. The report of the event state: “The prejudice against teaching girls to read and write began to give way…the good conduct and honesty of the peons in conveying the girls to and from school and parental treatment and indulgent attention of the teachers made the girls love the schools and literally run to them with alacrity and joy.”

A Dalit student of Savitribai, Muktabai, wrote a remarkable essay which was published in the paper Dyanodaya, in the year 1855. In her essay, Muktabai poignantly describes the wretchedness of the so-called untouchables and severely criticizes the Brahmanical religion for degrading and dehumanizing her people.

The post Love-Letters like no other appeared first on SabrangIndia.

According to farmer union leaders, a chakka jam will be strictly enforced on major roads and railway tracks during the bandh. Both government and private institutions have been urged to remain closed for the day. However, emergency vehicles, including ambulances and those related to weddings or critical situations, will be allowed to pass. The Samyukta Kisan Morcha (Non-political) and Kisan Mazdoor Morcha, led by Sarwan Singh Pandher, spearheaded the call for the bandh. They have garnered the backing of diverse groups, including traders, transporters, employee unions, toll plaza workers, labour organisations, ex-servicemen, Sarpanches, teachers’ unions, and other social and professional bodies.

A key aspect of the ongoing protests is the hunger strike by farmer leader Jagjit Singh Dallewal, who has been fasting for over one month to push for the implementation of 13 critical farm-related demands. Dallewal began his hunger strike on November 26, 2024, despite being hospitalised in Ludhiana due to his deteriorating health. In a show of solidarity, Sukhjit Singh Hardojhande, another prominent farmer leader, has continued the hunger strike on Dallewal’s behalf at the Khanauri protest site. The hunger strike has become a rallying point for the farmers, drawing widespread attention to their cause.

The protests being led by farmers are here to stay as they have also announced plans for a large-scale “Kisan Mahapanchayat” on 4 January 2025, to be held at the Khanauri protest site. Despite freezing temperatures and repeated roadblocks, the farmers remain determined, vowing to continue their fight for justice and reforms in agricultural policies. With the protests now at a critical juncture, the coming weeks will be crucial in determining the outcome of their demands. This event aims to bring together farmer leaders and supporters from various states to discuss the ongoing issues and the Union’s inaction. The announcement of the Maha Panchayat comes amidst concerns over Dallewal’s worsening health and the farmers’ determination to escalate their movement.

Impact of the bandh

Farmers associated with SKM (Non-Political) and KMM have been protesting at the Shambhu and Khanauri border points between Punjab and Haryana since February 13, 2024, after their march to Delhi was thwarted by security forces. In December pf 2024 itself, a “jatha” of 101 farmers made three attempts to march to the national capital on foot—on December 6, 8, and 14—only to be blocked by security personnel in Haryana each time. Despite these setbacks, the farmers remain steadfast, continuing their sit-ins and road blockades.

Today’s bandh is a continuation of their efforts to highlight long-standing grievances. Security has been tightened across the state, with farmers gathering at key locations, including highways and railway stations, from as early as 6:30 am. Over 150 trains, including the Vande Bharat Express, have been cancelled, and 13 others have been rescheduled. All educational institutions across the state remain closed, while emergency services continue to function. Blockades have been installed at approximately 280 points, bringing road and rail traffic to a standstill in many areas. Farmers also staged dharnas at various locations, including the Muktsar-Kotkapura road near Udekaran village and the Hoshiarpur-Phagwara Bypass, despite the severe cold wave gripping the region. 

Community support and solidarity

Speaking from a special stage set up due to his deteriorating health, Dallewal had addressed the farmers last week, expressing his gratitude for their support and emphasising the need for unity in their fight. “This battle will be won only if the whole country fights unitedly,” he stated in a frail voice. He also appealed to Haryana, Punjab’s “younger brother,” and other states to strengthen the movement. “Either we will win or die, one of two things will happen,” he declared, as farmer leader Abhimanyu Kohar assisted him during his speech.

The bandh has received overwhelming support from Punjab residents, with various groups contributing to its success. In Jalandhar’s Bhogpur, farmers organised a langar to provide food for commuters stranded due to disrupted rail services. Medical professionals across the state have also extended their support to the farmers’ movement. Farmer leader Sarwan Singh Pandher praised the people of Punjab for their wholehearted participation in the bandh and noted the widespread acceptance of the protest, evidenced by the scale of blockades and public cooperation.

The protest has also attracted political backing, with SAD leader Parvinder Singh Sohana and other party members visiting a protest site in Mohali to express solidarity with the farmers. The farmers’ movement, fuelled by a combination of grassroots mobilisation and community support, continues to gain momentum as the demands for justice and action grow louder.

On Saturday, December 28, renowned climate activist Sonam Wangchuk from Ladakh visited Dallewal at the Khanauri protest site to express solidarity. Wangchuk, who himself had undertaken a 16-day fast-unto-death earlier this year to advocate for Ladakh’s administrative concerns, described his visit as a gesture of goodwill and support from the people of Ladakh.

Supreme Court’s criticism of punjab government’s handling of Dallewal’s health

Dallewal, aged 70, has been on an indefinite fast since November 26, 2024, to press for a range of demands crucial to the farming community. These demands include a legal guarantee for the minimum support price (MSP) of crops, which has been one of the central issues fuelling the ongoing farmer protests at various border points between Punjab and Haryana. Dallewal’s fast, which has now entered its 35^th day, is part of a broader movement led by the Samyukta Kisan Morcha (Non-Political) and the Kisan Mazdoor Morcha.

The fast by leader Dallewal, and his deteriorating heath, has also drawn the eyes of the Supreme Court, with a special bench being set up on Saturday. On December 28, 2024, the Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Sudhashu Dhulia had sharply criticised the Punjab government for its failure to ensure that farmer leader Jagjit Singh Dallewal received proper medical treatment as his health continued to deteriorate. Justice Surya Kant, addressing the Punjab Chief Secretary during the court proceedings, stated that those resisting Dallewal’s hospitalisation were not his well-wishers. The Supreme Court’s remarks came in the context of a contempt petition filed against the Chief Secretary and the Director General of Police (DGP) of Punjab, accusing them of failing to comply with an earlier order requiring medical assistance for Dallewal and efforts to convince him to seek hospital care.

The Supreme Court had previously issued a directive on December 20, instructing the Punjab government to ensure Dallewal’s medical needs were met, including the option of moving him to a hospital. However, the state authorities expressed difficulty in transferring Dallewal due to resistance from protesting farmers. This delay in complying with the Court’s order has now led to growing concerns, with the Court pushing for a resolution. Justice Kant ordered that if the situation warranted, the Punjab government should seek assistance from the Centre to facilitate Dallewal’s hospitalisation. The Court gave the Punjab government a final deadline of December 31, 2024, to convince Dallewal to accept medical care. A compliance report was due by December 28, and the Chief Secretary and DGP were ordered to be present for the hearing.

The Supreme Court had previously instructed the Punjab government to provide medical aid to Dallewal and ensure that he was moved to a makeshift hospital established near the protest site, located 700 metres from the Khanauri border. However, the Punjab government expressed its inability to move Dallewal due to growing resistance from farmers, some of whom have gathered around him to prevent any intervention. The state representatives claimed they were in a difficult position, as the protesters had mobilised, especially the youth, to block any attempt to hospitalise Dallewal. Despite these obstacles, the Court expressed frustration with the state’s handling of the matter and warned that this could amount to “abetment of suicide.”

The Supreme Court further questioned why the situation had been allowed to escalate to this level, stating that the government’s failure to intervene had put Dallewal’s life in jeopardy. The Bench made it clear that if the Punjab government failed to take action, they might be compelled to use force to shift Dallewal to a hospital, risking further escalation. The Court also suggested that the state could seek help from the Union, if necessary, to avoid a situation where the farmer leader’s health deteriorates further.

Punjab Government’s unsuccessful attempts amidst farmer opposition

The Punjab government’s response to the situation has been complex and fraught with difficulty. An official from the state government had admitted, as per the Indian Express, that attempts to convince Dallewal to end his hunger strike peacefully had been unsuccessful. Dallewal, adamant in his resolve, has refused medical treatment and insists that he will not break his fast until the government agrees to the farmers’ demands, particularly the MSP guarantee and a debt waiver for farmers. The government has tried to approach Dallewal with a “clean slate” to find a solution that would ensure compliance with the Supreme Court’s order without triggering violent clashes.

However, there are fears within the Punjab government that using force to admit Dallewal to a hospital could lead to serious consequences, including loss of life. Farmers guarding Dallewal are prepared for the worst, and any use of force could ignite further unrest. As per multiple media reports, Kisan Mazdoor Morcha leader Sarwan Singh Pandher has made it clear that the farmers are willing to face whatever consequences may arise. Pandher warned that if the government used force to remove Dallewal, the farmers would hold the authorities responsible for any bloodshed. He also urged the youth from surrounding areas to mobilise at the Khanauri border to prevent the police from taking action during the night.

The situation has placed the Punjab government in a difficult position, as it must balance the Supreme Court’s directive with the escalating protests at the Khanauri border. The government is trying to find a way to comply with the Court’s orders while avoiding a forceful confrontation. Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, who had been out of the country, returned to India recently and reportedly held discussions with senior officials, including the DGP and Chief Secretary, to devise a strategy to resolve the issue.

Despite the government’s efforts to mediate, the farmers remain steadfast in their demands, which include a legal guarantee for MSP, debt waivers, and justice for victims of the 2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence. The Samyukta Kisan Morcha (Punjab unit) has condemned the indifference shown by both the state and central governments, calling for immediate intervention as Dallewal’s health continues to worsen.

Additionally, in a bid to intensify pressure on the Union government to address their demands and concerns over Jagjit Singh Dallewal’s health, protesting farmers’ leaders are planning to request a meeting with President Droupadi Murmu during the first week of January. Additionally, a rally is set to take place in Moga, Punjab, on January 9, where various farmer-related issues will be raised.

Dallewal denies being held hostage amid health crisis

It is essential to note that as remarks made by the Supreme Court hit the news, a video message was released on December 28, wherein Dallewal had directly addressed the claims made in the Supreme Court regarding his alleged confinement during his hunger strike. He rejected the notion that he was being held hostage, questioning, “I am sitting on a fast. Who gave this report to the Supreme Court, and who spread this misconception that I have been kept hostage? Where did such a thing come from?” As per the report of the Hindustan Times, the veteran leader, who has refused medical treatment during his fast, emphasised that his decision to continue the hunger strike was based on his own convictions and the critical issues affecting farmers in India, particularly their debt burden. He stated firmly, “Seven lakh farmers in this country have committed suicide due to debt. Saving farmers is necessary, therefore, I am sitting here. I am not under anyone’s pressure.”

Dallewal’s rejection of these claims underscores the level of resolve he has in continuing his protest despite mounting pressure and deteriorating health. He remains resolute in his stance that he will only break his fast once the government addresses the core demands of the farmers.

The failure of the government to address these demands has led to an extended deadlock. Attempts to end Dallewal’s fast through negotiation have largely been unsuccessful. On the evening of December 28, a delegation led by retired Additional Director General of Police (ADGP) Jaskaran Singh visited Dallewal in an attempt to convince him to accept medical assistance, but their efforts yielded no result. Singh, who later spoke alone with Dallewal, was unable to persuade the leader to end his fast or accept medical intervention. According to a senior police officer involved in the negotiations, “We can only request him (Dallewal) to understand the gravity of the situation, but despite repeated attempts, we haven’t been able to make any breakthrough so far.”

Farmer leader Sukhjeet Singh also mentioned that Punjab government officials had made two separate proposals to Dallewal, but both were rejected. He added that a third meeting was scheduled to take place, during which the officials hoped to offer a concrete solution, particularly in securing a meeting between the farmers’ representatives and the Union. Such a meeting, it is believed, could lead to Dallewal agreeing to receive medical care.

The long-running protest and the Government’s position- A stalemate

The ongoing protest by farmers, primarily from Punjab, at the Punjab-Haryana border has been in place since February 13 of this year. It began when the farmers’ “Chalo Delhi” march was stopped by security forces, preventing them from reaching the national capital to voice their demands for the legal guarantee of MSP. The farmers’ protests, organised by groups like the Samyukta Kisan Morcha and the Kisan Mazdoor Morcha, have continued through various phases, including a series of failed negotiations with the government.

Despite the long duration of the protests, the government has not been able to resolve the issues, leading to frustration on both sides. In an attempt to de-escalate tensions, Punjab government officials have held multiple discussions with Dallewal. However, each time, the proposals have been rejected by the protesting leader. The continued refusal to accept medical aid has left the government in a difficult position, as the Supreme Court has ordered that Dallewal be given medical treatment and moved to the hospital if necessary. However, the government faces resistance from the farmers, particularly those at the Khanauri border, who are determined to prevent any forceful eviction of their leader.

Despite the high stakes and intense pressure, farmer leaders have remained committed to a peaceful, non-violent approach, adhering to Gandhian principles. Abhimanyu Kohar, another leader involved in the protests, has been vocal about the government’s attempts to undermine the farmers’ movement and defame the protestors. Kohar argued that the narrative being pushed—that farmers are stubborn and unwilling to negotiate—is a distortion of the reality on the ground. “It is the Centre that is adopting such an attitude, not listening to us, and not paying any attention to farmers’ demands,” Kohar stated during a press conference at the Khanauri protest site, as per the Hindustan Times.

Kohar further emphasised that despite enduring significant hardships and oppression from the government, the farmers have stayed committed to the principles of non-violence. He explained, “We are continuing our agitation by adopting Gandhian principles. Our agitations have proven that, despite enduring so much due to the government’s oppression, we have continued to protest in a Gandhian manner.” The farmers, he stressed, are not seeking violence but are simply asking for their legitimate demands to be met.

Kohar also called on the people of India to rally in large numbers at the Khanauri border, as the protest enters a decisive phase. He claimed that the agitation has reached the threshold of victory and that it is now up to the government to decide how to proceed. “Dallewal has put his life at stake,” he said, emphasising the gravity of the situation and the farmers’ unwavering commitment to their cause.

Punjab CM Bhagwant Mann criticises BJP and PM Modi over farmers’ protest

The situation remains highly volatile, with the farmers continuing their protests at key border points in Punjab and Haryana. While there are ongoing efforts by the Punjab government and police to mediate a resolution, the protests show no sign of ending soon. The central government’s reluctance to meet the farmers’ demands, particularly concerning MSP guarantees, has kept the deadlock in place. The farmers’ resolve to fight for their rights, particularly the right to a fair income for their produce, continues to fuel the ongoing protest.

On December 24, Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann had lashed out at the BJP-led Union government, urging Prime Minister Narendra Modi to end his “stubbornness” and engage in dialogue with farmers protesting at the state’s border. The farmers are seeking a legal guarantee for Minimum Support Price for crops, among other demands. Mann’s remarks came in response to criticism from Punjab BJP president Sunil Kumar Jakhar, who questioned the timing of Mann’s upcoming Australia visit, especially with the state facing significant issues like the ongoing farmers’ protests.

In a tweet posted on his X handle, Mann made a pointed comparison, asking, “If Modi ji can stop the war between Russia and Ukraine, then can’t he talk to the farmers sitting 200 kilometres away (from Delhi)? What time are you waiting for?” This remark reflects Mann’s frustration with the union government’s handling of farmers’ demands.

ਕੇੰਦਰ ਸਰਕਾਰ ਨੂੰ ਆਪਣੀ ਪੁਰਾਣੀ ਜ਼ਿੱਦ ਛੱਡ ਕੇ ਕਿਸਾਨ ਜਥੇਬੰਦੀਆਂ ਨਾਲ ਗੱਲ-ਬਾਤ ਦਾ ਰਾਹ ਖੋਲਣਾ ਚਾਹੀਦਾ ਹੈ…ਕਬੂਤਰ ਦੇ ਅੱਖਾਂ ਮੀਚਣ ਨਾਲ ਬਿੱਲੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਭੱਜਦੀ..ਸੈੰਟਰ ਸਰਕਾਰ ਪਤਾ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੁਣ ਕਿਹੜੀ ਤਪੱਸਿਆ ਕਰ ਰਹੀ ਹੈ ?? ਜੇ ਮੋਦੀ ਜੀ ਰੂਸ ਤੇ ਯੂਕਰੇਨ ਦੀ ਜੰਗ ਰੁਕਵਾ ਸਕਦੇ ਨੇ ਤਾਂ 200 ਕਿੱਲੋਮੀਟਰ ਤੇ ਬੈਠੇ ਅੰਨਦਾਤਿਆਂ ਨਾਲ ਨਹੀੰ ਗੱਲ…

— Bhagwant Mann (@BhagwantMann) December 24, 2024

Further criticising the Union government, Mann accused the Modi administration of showing “step-motherly treatment” towards farmers and failing to address their legitimate concerns. In a statement to the media, he claimed that while Prime Minister Modi was actively engaging in global matters, while he was neglecting the pressing issues faced by the nation’s farmers. Mann pointed out that despite the serious and genuine demands of farmers, the government had been “blatantly ignoring” them, which he described as highly “deplorable.”

Mann’s remarks also touched upon the Prime Minister’s international image, suggesting that Modi’s focus on emerging as a “global leader” by intervening in global conflicts had overshadowed his responsibility to resolve domestic issues. “It is unfortunate that the prime minister is more worried about emerging as ‘global leader’ by intervening in international affairs rather than resolving the issues faced by the countrymen,” Mann added, expressing his dissatisfaction with the central government’s priorities.

Related:

Farmers Declare Punjab Bandh on Dec 30 amid Deteriorating Health of Dallewal

Candlelight protests in Greater Noida demand immediate release of jailed farmers

SKM: Condemns the arrest of farmers of Greater Noida

Farmers’ leader detained forcefully on Constitution Day as protests for delivering guarantee on legal MSP intensify

Adverse impact of climate change? 43% of farmers found half of their standing crops damaged

The post Fight far from over: Punjab farmers bring State to a standstill with Bandh amid hunger strike, a chakka jam, disruptions in road and rail transport appeared first on SabrangIndia.

IMSD calls upon Muslims to recall the views expressed by Sir Syed Ahmad Khan well over a century ago. In his time, he staunchly opposed Muslims who made a bonfire of books they did not like, or demanded its ban by the authorities. His advice was simple. Fight words with words if the book in question is worthy of a reasoned critique. Burning or banning such books implies that Muslims are incapable of an intellectual and moral defense of their faith. If the book (cartoon, play, film) is nothing but a gratuitous, salacious or malicious attack on Islam or its Prophet, his suggestion was: ignore it.

In 1861, an English writer William Muir had written a book in which he had made disparaging remarks against Prophet Mohammad. In response, Sir Syed travelled to London to study the books and journals that Muir had relied on and eight years later published a reasoned critique debunking Muir’s work.

Sir Syed’s advice to his fellow Muslims long ago is all the more relevant in today’s ‘new India’ where minorities are daily targets of Hindutva’s hate politics. Any ill-advised or hotheaded response to the publication of Satanic Verses – a book not Many Muslims are likely to have read earlier or will read now — will only provide more fodder to the Muslim-baiters. Besides, it will only give free publicity to the very book they want banished.

IMSD does draw the line between Free Speech, which it fully supports, and Hate Speech, which it staunchly opposes. While, the Constitution of India guarantees the right to freedom of speech, the law of the land also provides for penal action against hate speech.

Muslims, or anyone else for that matter, have the right to be offended by a book, cartoon, play or film and they have the right to protest in peaceful manner. They are also within their right to invoke existing provisions of criminal law to seek redressal of their grievance. But they do not have the right to silence the offender. A fatwa, firman or call to kill Salman Rushdie, as also the demand for a ban on Satanic Verses amounts to just that: silencing the offender.

Signatories:

1. Aarefa Johari, Gender rights activist, journalist, Mumbai
2. Akbar Shaikh, IMSD, Bhartiya Muslim Yuva Andolan, Solapur
3. Ahmad Rashid Shervani, Educationist, Hyderabad
4. A. J. Jawad, IMSD, Co-convener, Advocate, Chennai
5. Amir Rizvi, IMSD, Designer, Mumbai
6. Anwar Hussain, Corporate Executive
7. Anwar Rajan, IMSD, Pune
8. Arshad Alam, IMSD, Columnist, New Age Islam, Delhi
9. Askari Zaidi, IMSD, Senior Journalist, Delhi
10. Bilal Khan, IMSD, Activist, Mumbai
11. Farhan Rahman, Asst. Prof., Ranchi University, Ranchi
12. Feroz Abbas Khan, theatre and film director, playwright and screenwriter, Mumbai
13. Feroze Mithiborwala, IMSD, Co-convener, Bharat Bachao Andolan, Mumbai
14. Gauhar Raza, Anhad, Delhi
15. Hasan Ibrahim Pasha, Writer, Allahabad
16. A. J. Jawad, IMSD, Co-convener, Advocate, Chennai
17. Irfan Engineer, IMSD Co-convener, CSSS, Mumbai
18. Javed Anand, IMSD Convener, CJP, SabrangIndia Online, Mumbai
19. Kasim Sait, Businessman, Philanthropist, Chennai
20. Khadija Farouqui, IMSD, Gender rights activist, Delhi
21. Lara Jesani, IMSD, PUCL, Mumbai
22. Mansoor Sardar, IMSD, Bhiwandi
23. Masooma Ranalvi, IMSD, We Speak Out, Delhi
24. Mohammed Imran, PIO, USA
25. Muniza Khan, IMSD, CJP, Varanasi
26. Nasreen Fazelbhoy, IMSD, Mumbai
27. Qaisar Sultana, Home Maker, Allahabad
28. Qutub Jahan, IMSD, NEEDA, Mumbai
29. (Dr) Ram Puniyani, IMSD, Author, Activist, Mumbai
30. Sabah Khan, IMSD, Parcham, Mumbra/Mumbai
31. Shabana Mashraki, IMSD, Consultant, Mumbai
32. Shabnam Hashmi, Anhad, Delhi
33. (Dr) Shahnawaz Alam, IMSD
34. Shalini Dhawan, Designer, Mumbai
35. Shama Zaidi, Documentary Film Maker, Mumbai
36. Shamsul Islam, Author, Delhi
37. Sohail Hashmi, IMSD, Sahmat, Delhi
38. Sultan Shahin, Editor-in chief and publisher, New Age Islam, Delhi
39. Teesta Setalvad, Secretary, CJP, IMSD, Mumbai
40. Yousuf Saeed, Documentary Film Maker, Delhi
41. Zakia Soman, Co-convener BMMA, Delhi
42. Zeenat Shaukat Ali, IMSD, Wisdom Foundation, Mumbai

The post Fight words with words, IMSD opposes banning of books appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The arrests stem from an incident on December 26, 2024, when 13 individuals, including three women, associated with the Bhagat Singh Students Morcha (BSM), a Marxist student organisation at BHU, were taken into custody by the Lanka Police Station in Varanasi. They were subsequently sent to 14-day judicial custody by the Varanasi District Court. The arrests followed a discussion held on December 25 to mark Manusmriti Dahan Divas, commemorating Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s historic burning of the Manusmriti in 1927. The discussion, held at the university’s Arts Faculty, was disrupted by university officials and security staff, leading to a scuffle between the students and security guards. Among those detained are nine students and four alumni, currently held in District Jail, Chaukaghat. As they were transferred to jail, the students raised slogans such as “Manusmriti Murdabad, Inquilab Zindabad, Jai Bhim,” and “Stop violence against students,” highlighting their resistance to state repression. The jailed students were also interrogated by the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS).

The delegation also met with the Superintendent of the District Jail in Varanasi to address the mistreatment of the detained students. They submitted a memorandum outlining 10 key demands, including:

1. Immediate disciplinary action against police personnel who demanded a bribe of ₹200 per person to allow visitors to meet the students, along with threats of physical harm if the bribe was not paid.
2. Provision of facilities to the students in accordance with the jail manual.
3. Ensuring a conducive environment for study by accommodating the students in separate barracks.
4. Medical treatment for injured or unwell students, including proper examinations.
5. Avoiding the treatment of students as hardened criminals.

The delegation included Advocate Premprakash Singh Yadav, Advocate Ramdular Prajapati, Advocate Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Advocate Sushil Kumar, Advocate Kamlesh Yadav, Advocate Satyaprakash, Advocate Veerbali Singh Yadav, Advocate Awadhesh, Advocate Ajit Singh Yadav, Advocate Shridutt, and Advocate Rakesh.

Background of the incident

On December 25, 2024, the Bhagat Singh Students Morcha (BSM) organised a discussion at Banaras Hindu University (BHU) to observe Manusmriti Dahan Divas, commemorating the historic day in 1927 when Dr. B.R. Ambedkar burned the Manusmriti as a protest against caste discrimination. The event, held at the university’s Arts Faculty, was disrupted by BHU’s Proctorial Board guards, who allegedly misbehaved with the participants, forcibly dragging them to the Proctorial Board office, where they were locked up around 7:30 PM.

The following day, December 26, an FIR was filed against 13 members of the BSM, accusing them of serious offences. These individuals, including three women, were subsequently arrested by the Lanka Police Station and sent to 14-day judicial custody by the Varanasi District Court. Reports indicate that during the disruption, the students were physically assaulted, their clothes torn, and their glasses broken. Students who attempted to intervene were also pushed, beaten, and detained. It is further alleged that the Proctorial Board and the police issued threats to the students, warning of retaliation and harm to their future prospects.

The arrested students were held overnight at the Lanka Police Station without access to legal counsel. Allegedly, they were beaten and sustained injuries while in custody. These students are now detained in District Jail, Chaukaghat.

An FIR (No. 523/2024) was filed against the students under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023. These include:

• Section 132: Assault or criminal force to deter a public servant from duty.
• Section 121(2): Causing grievous hurt to a public servant.
• Section 196(1): Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, or language.
• Section 299: Outraging religious feelings through deliberate and malicious acts.
• Section 190: Unlawful assembly for an offence committed by the group.
• Section 191(2): Rioting.
• Section 115(2): Voluntarily causing hurt.
• Section 110: Attempt to commit culpable homicide.

The FIR, filed on the complaint of BHU Security Officer Omprakash Tiwari and Assistant Security Officer Hasan Abbas Zaidi, states that on December 25 at 5:30 PM, a group of 20–25 BSM members gathered near the Arts Faculty Square, allegedly planning to burn copies of the Manusmriti as part of the Manusmriti Dahan Divas observance. The complainants, accompanied by Proctorial Board members and security personnel, approached the group to pacify them. However, the students allegedly misbehaved, pushed, and assaulted the security team.

The FIR claims that two women security personnel, Shipra Mishra and Shikha Mishra, sustained serious injuries and fainted during the altercation, requiring treatment at BHU Trauma Centre. The report also alleges that the actions of the students disrupted public harmony.

The 13 individuals identified in the FIR include Mukesh Kumar, Sandeep Jaiswal, Amar Sharma, Arvind Pal, Anupam Kumar, Lakshman Kumar, Avinash, Arvind, Shubham Kumar, Adarsh, Ipsita Agarwal, Siddhi Tiwari, and Katyayani B. Reddy. The charges against them carry a maximum sentence of 10 years imprisonment.

A detailed report may be read here.

Related:

Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill: Bogey of “urban naxals” invoked to legitimise clamping down of dissent?

A new hope: Student activists charged under UAPA get bail

Hate Unleashed: Protest erupts in Quantum University, students’ chant “Jai Shree Ram” over namaz

The post BHU students arrested for allegedly trying to burn Manusmriti remain in jail as advocates push for removal of false charges appeared first on SabrangIndia.

This ongoing work is crucial in addressing the rise of communal violence and polarisation, safeguarding India’s democratic values, and ensuring that the principles of secularism and social harmony are upheld amidst an increasingly contentious political climate.

The importance of accountability: CJP’s work with the NBDSA in 2024

In 2024, Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) filed six complaints with the News Broadcasting and Digital Standards Authority (NBDSA) to challenge the spread of hate, misinformation, and divisive content in television news. The complaints targeted major media outlets:

• Aaj Tak: 1 complaint
• Zee News: 1 complaint
• Times Now Navbharat: 2 complaints
• India TV: 2 complaints

Key outcomes in the year:

Orders received: 5

• 4 against Times Now Navbharat: All resulted in the removal of contentious shows broadcasted on TNN, which were:

1. Operation Mazaar – Promoting hate and baseless claims against Muslim communities.
2. Hindu Rashtra Broadcast – Legitimising religious bias and communal rhetoric.
3. Madrassas in UP – Stereotyping minority institutions with unfounded accusations.
4. Minority Students and UCC – Misrepresenting and dividing citizens with false narratives.

• 1 against Aaj Tak: The NBDSA refrained from passing an order as an FIR had been filed in the matter of Aaj Tak’s anchor Sudhir Chaudhary making casteist comments against Jharkhand CM

• Orders pending: 6
  • After hearing: 2
  • Hearing yet to take place: 4

The broader media crisis in India: These figures are part of a growing concern regarding the role of the media in spreading hate and propaganda across India. Multiple studies and reports have underscored how sections of the media are complicit in amplifying divisive rhetoric:

• The 2023 Newslaundry-Lokniti CSDS Media Survey Report had revealed that 82% of the surveyed scribes believed that the media favoured the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). A majority of those surveyed (80%) also reported that they found the news coverage to be “too favourable” to the BJP, while 61% felt that it was “too unfavourable” towards the opposition parties.
• The Hate Speech and Media Report (2019) by the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) linked media narratives to communal hate incidents in the country.
• Reports from the Press Council of India have repeatedly criticised the growing trend of polarising and unethical journalism.

Such patterns are deeply concerning, as inflammatory broadcasts have been shown to exacerbate real-world violence and deepen communal divides.

Why this work matters: CJP’s interventions with the NBDSA reflect a critical effort to restore accountability and ethical standards in Indian media. By filing complaints and challenging problematic content, CJP plays a vital role in:

• Holding powerful broadcasters accountable for their role in spreading divisive narratives.
• Curbing the spread of hate speech, which can trigger violence and undermine social cohesion.
• Promoting responsible journalism that informs rather than divides.

The NBDSA, as a self-regulatory body, remains an important check on the misuse of media power. However, civil society efforts—like those led by CJP—are essential to ensure this mechanism remains effective and responsive. In a time when propaganda poses an unprecedented threat to democracy, CJP’s work serves as a necessary intervention to protect truth, justice, and plurality in India’s media landscape.

Challenging divisive rhetoric: CJP’s complaints to the ECI and SEC in 2024

In 2024, CJP filed 16 complaints with the Election Commission of India (ECI) and State Election Commissions (SEC) to address the rising misuse of religion during election campaigns. This practice, which violates the Representation of the People Act (RPA), 1951, remains a persistent challenge to free and fair elections.

Breakdown of complaints:

• Election Commission of India (ECI): 1 complaint
• State Election Commission, Maharashtra: 10 complaints
• State Election Commission, Jharkhand: 5 complaints

These complaints primarily targeted speeches and campaigns where political parties or candidates invoked religious identities to influence voters, a violation of Section 123(3) of the RPA, which classifies such appeals as a “corrupt electoral practice”.

Impact so far:

• FIRs filed: Two complaints in Maharashtra State Election Commission had also resulted in First Information Reports (FIRs), one against Suresh Chavhanke and the other against Kajal Hindustani, marking a significant step towards legal accountability.

These FIRs underscore the seriousness of the violations reported and demonstrate the role of civil society in pushing for stricter enforcement of electoral laws.

The role of election bodies and the broader crisis: Despite clear legal and procedural frameworks, political parties continue to deploy religious and communal rhetoric to polarise voters. This is not an isolated issue:

• The Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) noted in 2023 that appeals to religion, particularly during high-stakes elections, have increased significantly.
• Reports from multiple elections show that inflammatory speeches—rife with religious overtones—often go unchecked, despite the Election Commission’s Model Code of Conduct (MCC) explicitly prohibiting such practices.
• Recent electoral campaigns have repeatedly demonstrated how divisive rhetoric overshadows critical issues like governance, education, employment, and development.

The Election Commission of India and its state-level counterparts are constitutional bodies tasked with upholding electoral integrity. However, inconsistent enforcement and delays in action have allowed political actors to exploit religious identities for electoral gain.

Why this work matters CJP’s complaints and the resulting FIRs reflect a crucial intervention to safeguard India’s electoral integrity. By actively challenging violations, CJP aims to:

• Enforce compliance with the RPA and MCC to ensure elections remain free from communal manipulation.
• Discourage the misuse of religion for votes, which fragments communities and deepens social divisions.
• Reaffirm the secular nature of India’s democracy, as enshrined in the Constitution.

The filing of FIRs based on CJP’s complaints is a concrete reminder that such violations carry legal consequences. It also highlights the urgent need for stronger enforcement mechanisms to curb the misuse of religion in electioneering.

Unchecked divisive rhetoric during elections not only undermines democratic ideals but also fuels hatred and violence. CJP’s interventions aim to restore the focus of election campaigns on real issues that matter to the electorate. In a time when polarisation threatens India’s social fabric, ensuring accountability in the electoral process is more critical than ever. By challenging violations, CJP underscores the urgent need for stronger enforcement mechanisms to protect democracy from communal exploitation.

Confronting hate: CJP’s complaints to law enforcement authorities

In 2024, CJP filed 20 post-event police complaints as well as 10 preventive complaints against hate speeches and hate events to prevent such content from being delivered at public events. These interventions are a critical part of CJP’s ongoing efforts to curb the growing threat of hate speech and its role in inciting violence across the country.

Key statistics over the year:

• Police complaints filed against hate speech: 20
  • Maharashtra: 12 complaints
  • Other states: 8 complaints
• Preventive police complaints (filed before events where hate speech was likely to be delivered): 10
• Delegation with complaint before event: 1
  • Outcome: The event was denied permission, preventing potential hate speech and communal tension.

These efforts are a response to the increasingly divisive and inflammatory rhetoric being used in public spaces, especially at political rallies and religious events. The rising frequency of such incidents is well-documented. For instance, according to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) 2022 data, there’s been an increase of 45% in cases pertaining to hate speech and other acts to promote enmity between groups on the ground of religion, race, language and place of birth registered under IPC section 153A in India in the past two years.

NCM complaint by CJP: Addressing hate speech

In addition to law enforcement efforts, CJP filed one complaint with the National Commission for Minorities (NCM). This complaint addressed specific instances of hate speech targeting minority communities delivered by Suresh Chavhanke, Chairman and Editor-in-Chief of Sudarshan News. Such complaint forms a crucial step towards holding public figures and entities accountable for spreading divisive rhetoric. The NCM’s involvement plays a key role in ensuring that hate speech targeting minorities is addressed at a national level and in ensuring that perpetrators are held accountable for their actions.

The growing threat of hate speech: Despite existing legal frameworks—such as criminal provisions which penalises promoting enmity between groups and penalises deliberate acts to outrage religious feelings—hate speech remains rampant, especially during election periods and public events. In 2023, the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) reported that communal and hate-driven content during election campaigns increased by 25% in major states.

Why this work matters: CJP’s proactive and responsive approach is essential in addressing the persistent issue of hate speech, which continues to erode communal harmony and promote violence. These efforts are directly aligned with the constitutional mandates of secularism and unity, as they aim to prevent the misuse of religion for divisive political gains.

By filing complaints and pursuing preventive actions, CJP is:

• Holding perpetrators accountable under the law, ensuring that hate speech does not go unchecked.
• Intervening early to prevent potential communal clashes by blocking platforms that could amplify divisive narratives.
• Encouraging more consistent enforcement from law enforcement agencies, setting a strong example for other states and authorities.

CJP has, throughout the year, meticulously documented these instances of hate speech, highlighting the potential for social division and violence. The filing of FIRs and the denial of permission for events indicate a growing recognition of the need for law enforcement to act decisively. These actions show that it is possible to curtail hate speech and prevent violence before it spreads. CJP’s ongoing efforts continue to prove that effective legal interventions, combined with timely police action, are crucial to preventing the escalation of communal tensions in a diverse democracy like India.

Conclusion: Upholding accountability and secularism in the face of rising divisiveness

CJP’s work in 2024 underscores the importance of proactive civil society interventions in combating hate speech and divisive rhetoric across various platforms. By filing complaints, seeking accountability from media outlets, election authorities, and law enforcement, and ensuring that legal provisions are enforced, CJP plays a vital role in preserving India’s democratic ideals and secular fabric. As hate speech continues to fuel violence and deepen communal divides, CJP’s efforts highlight the urgent need for sustained action to curb such rhetoric, protect vulnerable communities, and foster a society rooted in equality and harmony. These interventions serve as a crucial reminder that a united and just India depends on all sectors working together to uphold the rule of law and the values of tolerance and coexistence.

Related:

The judiciary’s commitment to protecting rights: notable Supreme Court judgments of 2024

CJP files 5 hate speech complaints before CEO Maharashtra as violated MCC

CJP’s Landmark Victory Against Hate in Media | Times Now Navbharat Pulled Up by NBDSA

2024: Love Jihad as a socio-political tool: caste, endogamy, and Hindutva’s dominance over gender and social boundaries in India

The post Fighting divisiveness: CJP’s comprehensive approach to tackling hate speech appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The 13 individuals—nine students and four alumni—are currently being held in District Jail, Chaukaghat. As they were shifted to jail, the students raised slogans like “Manusmriti Murdabad, Inquilab Zindabad, Jai Bhim,” and “Stop violence against students,” emphasizing their opposition to the state’s repression.

The jailed students were also interrogated by the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS)

Background

On December 25, a discussion was organized by the Bhagat Singh Students Front at BHU on the occasion of Manusmriti Dahan Divas. The significance of this historic day lies in the fact that Dr. B.R. Ambedkar had burned the Manusmriti on this day in 1927. Members of the Bhagat Singh Students Front had gathered to discuss this topic. During the discussion, the guards of the BHU Proctorial Board came and misbehaved with the students, dragging them to the Proctorial Board office. The students were locked up there around 7:30 PM. Later, on December 26, 2024, an FIR with serious charges was filed against 13 members of the BSM, and they were arrested and sent to 14-days of judicial custody.

As per report, during this incident, the students were physically assaulted, their clothes were torn, and their glasses were broken. Any student who came to help them was also pushed, shoved, and beaten. BHU guards and the Varanasi police threatened the students with various kinds of threats, including ruining their future and warnings of retaliation. All of this took place during the ‘Manusmriti Dahan Divas’ discussion held at the Arts Faculty, BHU.

It is alleged that the police and Proctorial Board members beat up the arrested students. They were kept locked in the Lanka police station overnight and were not allowed to meet their lawyers. Reports suggest that the students suffered serious injuries during this time. Their clothes were torn, and their glasses were broken. Students who went to the Proctorial Board for help were also detained after being pushed and assaulted.

FIR registered under the serious provisions of BNS, 2023

An FIR (No. 523/2024) has been filed by the Lanka Police Station against the 13 students under sections 132 (assault or criminal force to deter a public servant from the discharge of their duty), 121(2) (causing grievous hurt to a public servant), 196(1) (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc.), 299 (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs), 190 (unlawful assembly for any offence committed by the group), 191(2) (rioting), 115(2) (voluntarily causing hurt to another person), and 110 (attempt to commit culpable homicide) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

According to the FIR, registered on the written complaint of BHU Security Officer Omprakash Tiwari and H.A. Zaidi, it states, “On 25.12.2024, at 5:30 pm, 20-25 students associated with Bhagat Singh Chhatra Morcha were sitting near the Arts Faculty Square and lighting a fire. Confidential information was received that these individuals were celebrating Manusmriti Dahan Diwas that day and planning to burn copies of Manusmriti. Acting on this information, I, Omprakash Tiwari, Security Officer, along with my colleagues Hasan Abbas Zaidi (Assistant Security Officer), Security Inspector Bhaiyalal, and Proctorial Board members Prof. Fate Bahadur Singh, Dr. Sujit Kumar Singh, Dr. Ajay Yadav, Dr. Amresh Singh, Dr. Upendra Kumar, Dr. Divya Bharti, Dr. Ravi Shankar Mishra, along with female security guards Shipra Mishra, Shikha Mishra, and other security personnel, reached the spot and attempted to pacify them. However, the following students misbehaved and pushed us. After this, I was warned that if we took any action against the rules, further action would be taken.”

“The following students did not heed the warning and started pushing and hitting me and other people present with me, obstructing the work of the public government, due to which two of my women security personnel Shipra Mishra and Shikha Mishra got seriously injured and fainted on the spot. They are being treated at BHU Trauma Center. Their actions are having an adverse effect on maintaining harmony. A total of 13 students have been identified in this incident” as per FIR.

The arrested students include Mukesh Kumar, Sandeep Jaiswal, Amar Sharma, Arvind Pal, Anupam Kumar, Lakshman Kumar, Avinash, Arvind, Shubham Kumar, Adarsh, Ipsita Agarwal, Siddhi Tiwari, and Katyayani B. Reddy. These students have been charged under the provisions, which carry a provision for up to 10 years of imprisonment.

The FIR dated 26.12.2024 can be read here

BSM said, suppression done at the behest of Brahmanical and Hindutva forces

The President of Bhagat Singh Students Front, Akanksha Azad, termed the action taken against the students as “suppression done at the behest of Brahmanical and Hindutva forces.” While dismissing the accusations against BSM, Akanksha said that, “We deny all the fabricated allegations raised against us by the university-police nexus. They want to crush dissent and our organization. In fact, they are suppressing every civil organization that questions this RSS fascist government” as the Observer Post Reported

She said, “We are the heirs of Baba Saheb and Bhagat Singh’s thoughts. Whatever efforts are made to suppress our voice, we will stand firm even stronger.”

Akanksha alleged that the BHU administration and police took this action under pressure from fascist forces. She stated, “Sending students to jail for discussing texts like Manusmriti is like mocking democracy. Manusmriti gives women and Dalits a status worse than that of animals, and such oppressive actions cannot crush their dreams and ideas.”

The Bhagat Singh Students Front has demanded the immediate release of the arrested students. They called for the false report to be annulled immediately and FIRs to be filed against the policemen and BHU guards who used violence against the students. The organization said, “Our courage and dreams cannot be suppressed. The arrest of students on Manusmriti Day has once again proven that freedom of expression is under threat. But the people of Banaras, who have always been a land of knowledge, dialogue, and ideas, will not remain silent against this injustice.”

Akanksha claimed that the students’ mobile phones were seized, and they were not allowed to inform their families, which is a clear violation of Supreme Court and Human Rights Commission directives. On December 26, the students were presented before the remand court and sent to jail. The FIR filed includes very serious charges. This incident not only violates the students’ rights but also openly disregards judicial processes and human rights.

FIR reveals no serious allegations against students, only ideological dissent

The FIR filed in connection with the December 25 incident at BHU highlights an ideological disagreement between the students and the administration, rather than any serious criminal behavior. The report indicates that students associated with Bhagat Singh Chhatra Morcha were peacefully engaged in a discussion to commemorate Manusmriti Dahan Divas. Following confidential information, police and security officers intervened, but the situation escalated into a minor physical altercation. The FIR does not point to any major criminal activity, with injuries to security personnel attributed to the scuffle.

While the FIR claims that the students’ actions impacted public harmony, it seems more like an effort to suppress student activism rather than address any serious offense. The students were charged under serious provisions, but the allegations appear inflated, raising concerns about attempts to silence dissent.

What is Manusmriti?

Manusmriti, often a topic of controversy, especially in the context of women and marginalized communities, is seen as a symbol of caste and gender discrimination in Indian society. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar famously burned it in 1927 as an act of protest. Manusmriti is an ancient Hindu religious text, consisting of 12 chapters and over 2,600 verses. It was first translated into English in 1776. Maharishi Manu, considered the author, is regarded as the spokesperson for the “human constitution” and the architect of societal norms. These laws, known as “Manuism,” laid down controversial rules regarding women’s rights and freedoms.

Controversial views on women

Manusmriti outlines a societal structure where women are seen as subordinate to their father, husband, or son, and can never be independent. In Chapter 5, Verse 148, it states that after marriage, a woman should remain under the protection of her husband or sons after his death. It further asserts that women have a nature to “seduce men” and should be kept under strict surveillance.

The text also contains statements such as, “Do not marry a woman with red hair or eyes, one with extra limbs, who is often ill, or one from a low caste.” It advises against marriage to a woman whose name refers to terror, rivers, trees, or snakes. Additionally, it says that Brahmins should not eat in the presence of menstruating women, pigs, dogs, or eunuchs.

These rules deny the equality and freedom of women and attempt to subjugate them under patriarchal control. The Manusmriti has long been a source of debate, and its controversial nature highlights the ongoing fight for equality and freedom in society.

Dr. Ambedkar’s protest against Manusmriti

Due to its oppressive views, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar burned the Manusmriti in 1927, condemning it as a text that violated the rights of Dalits and women. However, some still regard it as a guiding text for societal welfare, albeit ignoring its controversial aspects. Historian Kurundkar has provided insights into Manusmriti’s structure, explaining that the text was composed around 200-300 years before the birth of Christ. The first chapter covers topics like the creation of nature, the four yugas (ages), the four varnas (classes), and the greatness of Brahmins. Subsequent chapters address topics like celibacy, marriage, household duties, and various forms of punishment.

The fifth chapter, which is particularly controversial, discusses the duties of women, their purity, and their place in society. The book also covers the roles of saints, kings, criminal justice, and the praise of the Vedas in the final chapters.

Controversial aspects of Manusmriti

Dalit scholar Rajiv Lochan explains that Manusmriti discusses rights, crimes, justice, and punishment in a manner akin to the modern Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Criminal Procedure Code (CRPC). When the British arrived in India, they saw Manusmriti as the Hindu equivalent of Sharia law and began using it as a reference in legal matters. This led to the belief that Manusmriti was the Hindu “holy book.”

Lochan suggests that Brahmins, facing a decline in their power due to the rise of Buddhist teachings, revived Manusmriti to reassert their dominance. It propagated the myth that Brahmins were superior in society, while others faced harsher punishments. The text even asserts that a woman’s welfare can only be achieved through the welfare of a man, and that women should have no religious rights.

The British and Manusmriti’s influence

During British rule, Manusmriti became a subject of widespread discussion due to its use in legal matters. William Jones’ English translation of the text brought it into public knowledge. Mahatma Jyotirao Phule was one of the first to challenge Manusmriti, critiquing Brahmins and merchants while highlighting the dire conditions of Dalits and marginalized groups.

When Ambedkar burned the Manusmriti

On July 25, 1927, Dr. Ambedkar publicly burned Manusmriti at Mahad in Maharashtra. In his book Philosophy of Hinduism, Ambedkar writes, “Manu advocated the four-fold varna system, laying the foundation of caste-based discrimination. While Manu did not create the caste system, he certainly sowed its seeds.”

Ambedkar also recorded his opposition to Manusmriti in his works Who Were the Shudras? and The End of Caste. At that time, Dalits and women were denied the right to live a dignified life, and the caste system thrived on the Brahminical supremacy. Ambedkar described the caste system as a multi-story building with no stairs, where people are divided based on their work, and the lower castes are relegated to the bottom with no possibility of advancement.

The legacy of Ambedkar’s protest

After Ambedkar’s act of burning the Manusmriti, similar protests occurred across the country, leading to discussions in newspapers about the text’s influence on Indian society. Even after India’s independence, the debate continued. In 1970, Kanshi Ram formed BAMCEF, declaring that Indian society was divided between the “Manuwadi” (followers of Manu) and the “Mulnivasi” (indigenous people).

Related

Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill: Bogey of “urban naxals” invoked to legitimise clamping down of dissent?

A new hope: Student activists charged under UAPA get bail

Hate Unleashed: Protest erupts in Quantum University, students’ chant “Jai Shree Ram” over namaz

The post 13 BHU students arrested and interrogated by ATS over allegation of burning Manusmriti appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The video of the incident may be viewed here:

As provided by a report of the Observer Post, Abu Bakr claimed that he was stopped outside the examination hall and told to shave off his beard before being allowed to proceed. A video of the incident, which went viral on social media, shows the examiner stating, “If a student maintains a beard, I believe we should conduct an examination or ask them a question.” This discriminatory statement raises serious concerns about the lack of professionalism and the infringement on personal rights in educational institutions.

There is no official rule that mandates the removal of a beard for examinations, yet the examiner’s actions suggest a deeply ingrained bias against religious expression, particularly against Muslim students. As per the report, the individual who filmed the incident highlighted the absurdity of the demand, stating, “There are no rules as such to ask someone to shave their beard in a classroom; it is only permitted to ask if you are in a position to offer a job or in a job interview.” Abu Bakr also recounted an additional humiliating interaction, where the examiner questioned whether he had completed the Hajj pilgrimage. Upon Abu Bakr’s response that he had performed Umrah, the examiner reportedly accused him of lying and insisted that he shave his beard completely, implying that his religious identity was subject to interrogation.

In an attempt to defend her actions, the examiner claimed that no discrimination based on religion took place and that examinations are conducted fairly for all students. However, the absurdity of the demand—especially considering the complete lack of any formal rule requiring a shaved face—demonstrates a deeper problem of cultural and religious intolerance masquerading as routine procedure. The individual who recorded the video rightly pointed out that simply conducting exams for everyone does not give anyone the right to impose such personal and religious demands on a student.

The incident has drawn condemnation from various quarters, including Shazad Khan Patan, an AMC leader, who expressed his concern over the growing religious intolerance in Gujarat. He stated, “I learned about the incident from the media. A Muslim student’s exam had been denied because he had a beard. In this nation, fanaticism has reached such a high level that students have to deal with it. It’s a pretty embarrassing situation.” Patan further accused the state of Gujarat of becoming a hub for religious extremism, where such discriminatory practices are becoming increasingly normalised. He emphasised that the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to religious freedom, including the right to express one’s faith through visible markers such as a beard or a hijab.

This incident is a glaring example of the growing religious intolerance in India, where actions rooted in personal beliefs and cultural biases are increasingly encroaching upon the rights of individuals. What is even more disturbing is that such discriminatory actions are often justified by authorities as a part of regular procedures, further normalizing the marginalization of religious minorities. In a secular country like India, where the Constitution protects the rights of individuals to practice their religion freely, incidents like these are not just shameful—they represent a dangerous erosion of the inclusive, pluralistic values that the nation was built upon. The incident serves as a stark reminder of the ongoing struggles that religious minorities, particularly Muslims, face in India today, and the urgent need to challenge such discriminatory practices at every level of society.

Related:

Special Report: ‘They came like monkeys; they came like Nazis.’ Ambedkari Bastis in Parbhani face the traumas of police brutality

Heroes among us: Waris Khan’s rescue of 7 after road accident, Arif Bamane’s rescue after Neelkamal ferry accident

CJP files preventive complaint to safeguard Shirdi’s religious harmony

Hate speech and calls for violence at Yati Narsinghanand’s Mahayagya event– A push for a Hindu Rashtra amidst dog whistling against Muslims

The post Muslim student denied exam for wearing beard in Ahmedabad: A disturbing reflection of rising intolerance appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Dallewal, president, of the Bharatiya Kisan Union (Sidhupur) has been observing fast unto death for 28 days to press the government to ensure minimum support price (MSP) as per the MS Swaminathan Commission recommendations and one-time debt relief from government banks and private moneylenders. There were reports of widespread protests on Monday in Andhra Pradesh, Odisha, Punjab, Haryana, Kerala, Tamil Nadu to Kashmir and Uttarakhand.

Farmers organisations are also enraged over arrests and registration of alleged fake FIRs in Greater Noida in Uttar Pradesh where they have been demanding development of 10% residential plots given in lieu of land procured for residential societies and industries. The protesting farmers also burnt a copy of the draft National Policy Framework on Agricultural Marketing which they alleged was “the return of the repealed farm laws through backdoor.”

Kuldeep Singh, who was part of the protesting farmers in Jogindernagar, Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, told NewsClick  over the phone that they submitted a memorandum to President of India Droupadi Murmu through Block Development Officer, Mandi, and burnt the draft of the proposed agriculture marketing policy.

“We fought a year-long struggle at the borders of Delhi and it was the martyrdom of 750 farmers that pushed the Narendra Modi government to repeal the three black farm laws. Now, this policy seeks to transfer our produce to private traders without fair pricing. The policy document does not even mention the word MSP. Similarly, it has recommended contract farming.”

The SKM said the protests were being held to remind the Centre of its promise to devise methods to ensure MSP in a legal framework. While some farmer organisations pressed for complete procurement of produce through state agencies, others wanted punitive charges for buying the produce below MSP.

The Centre, through its Secretary (Farmers Welfare) Sanjay Agarwal had assured the SKM leadership that it would form a committee, including representatives from the Centre and state governments, agricultural scientists and farmer leaders of different unions with the mandate to devise methods to implement MSP.

Agarwal’s letter dated December 9, 2021 also noted that the Union government in principle had agreed to withdraw criminal cases by its agencies for participation in the historic famers’ struggle and it would appeal to the state governments too to withdraw the cases. The Centre had also assured farmers that it would hold discussions on the provisions impacting farmers in the Electricity Amendment Act.

However, the government’s invitation to SKM to the committee on Zero Budget Farming was turned down by the Morcha leaders, who alleged that the committee had majority members who had backed the ‘black’ farm laws.

Why MSP is Crucial?

The farmers bodies have maintained that the Commission on Agriculture Costs and Prices (CACP), the Central body responsible for announcing MSP for procuring crops from farmers, had been employing a wrong methodology for calculating the input costs of seeds, fertiliser, herbicides, pesticides, diesel and harvesting. While CACP has used A2 + FL formula, the farmers have been demanding C2+ 50% for just returns on the produce. A2 covers major costs such as fertilisers, pesticides, herbicides and diesel among others and FL implies unpaid family labour. C2 refers to comprehensive costs that also cover rents and forgone interest on land apart from traditional costs.

On Dallewal’s fast and deteriorating health, SKM leaders said in case of any untoward development, the entire responsibility would fall on Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Home Minister Amit Shah, Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann and Haryana Chief Minister Nayab Singh Saini.

In a statement, SKM core team member Darshan Pal said, “Instead of discussing the acute distress faced by farmers and agricultural labourers, the NDA-3 government is further unleashing an onslaught on agriculture, industry and services through the New National Agriculture Market Policy and Digital Agriculture Mission, National Cooperation Policy, imposing four labour codes and One Nation One Election that erodes the federal rights of the State Governments to facilitate the corporate agenda of ‘one nation one market for corporate profiteering’.

Memorandum to President

The memorandum submitted to the President of India by SKM leaders read, “It is highly unfortunate that the Prime Minister, Shri. Narendra Modi is not ready to hold discussions with farmer organisations on struggles. Instead, consistent efforts are there to brutally suppress the struggles of farmers at Shambu and Khanuri borders of Punjab and Noida-Greater Noida in Uttar Pradesh by using tear gas shelling, rubber bullets, water cannons and putting hundreds of farmers in jail for holding peaceful demonstrations and Dharna.”

It further noted that In the Gautam Buddha Nagar, the FIR No.0538 dated December 4, 2024, revealed that the Police Commissionerate had implicated 112 farmers on false charges under Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Nyay Samhita for attempt to murder of a police sub-inspector…. “The farmers are in jail for the last 21 days,” it added.

The memorandum also held that the “new National Agriculture Market Policy is part of the strategy of the corporate agenda to permit backdoor resurrection of the three farm laws. The conscious efforts in the last two years to thwart procurement in APMC markets in Punjab and Haryana, dismantle FCI by promoting cash transfer on food subsidy, reduction of food subsidy by Rs. 60,470 Cr. and fertiliser subsidy by Rs. 62,445 Cr. in the last three consecutive years are corporate attacks on the existing system of limited MSP and Food security of the country.”

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Save Dallewal’s Life, Hold Discussion on MSP, Says SKM in Memo to President Murmu appeared first on SabrangIndia.