The heightened security followed a violent confrontation during a court-mandated anti-encroachment drive conducted by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) on land adjoining the Faiz-e-Ilahi Masjid, located near Ramlila Maidan.

Legal Origins of the Demolition: From survey to High Court direction

The demolition drive was the culmination of a legal process initiated months earlier. One Preet Sirohi had approached the Delhi High Court seeking removal of alleged encroachments at the mosque complex. In response, a joint survey was conducted by the MCD, the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), and the Land & Development Office (L&DO) under the Ministry of Urban Development.

According to the Joint Survey Report (JSR), authorities identified:

• 2,512 square feet of encroachment on a road belonging to the Public Works Department (PWD), and
• 36,428 square feet of MCD land encroached upon for non-religious, commercial uses, including a baraat ghar (wedding hall), parking facilities, and a private diagnostic centre (ThePrint).

Relying on these findings, the Delhi High Court, in its November 12, 2025 order, directed the PWD and the MCD to remove the encroachments. However, the court also directed that the mosque management committee must be granted a hearing before any coercive action was taken. This order formed the legal foundation for all subsequent administrative and enforcement actions. (The Times of India)

Administrative hearings and the MCD’s December 22 order

In compliance with the court’s direction, the MCD held two hearings on November 24 and December 16, attended by representatives of the mosque management committee, DDA officials, and L&DO officers (The Indian Express).

During these proceedings:

• Hafiz Matloob Karim, general secretary of the mosque committee, denied the existence of a wedding hall, stating instead that a vacant portion of the premises was used “occasionally” for marriage functions.
• the mosque predated Independence;
• it was adjoined by a graveyard with no clear demarcation;
• He submitted that a charitable clinic was being run for the needy at marginal charges.
• The committee asserted that the mosque was a “waqf by user” property, arguing that no title deed was required under waqf law.

A representative of the Delhi Waqf Board referred to a February 1940 agreement under which 0.195 acres of land had been leased to the mosque.

In its order dated December 22, the MCD rejected these submissions, stating that:

• No documentary evidence had been placed on record to establish lawful possession or ownership of the land beyond the 0.195 acres the mosque management committee, or the Delhi Waqf Boar;
• Religious structures such as a masjid, dargah, or graveyard could not be used for commercial activities like marriage functions or diagnostic services;
• Any structure beyond the 0.195-acre tract constituted encroachment and misuse of public land.

The order explicitly held that such use was a “blatant misuse of public land” and directed removal of all structures beyond the demarcated area (Hindustan Times).

Mosque committee moves the High Court again

Challenging the MCD’s decision, the mosque management committee filed a fresh writ petition before the Delhi High Court, seeking to set aside the December 22 order. The petition emphasised that:

• The mosque predated Independence;
• It was adjoined by a graveyard with no clear demarcation;
• the wedding hall and diagnostic centre had already ceased operations;
• The committee had no objection to removal of commercial encroachments but sought protection for the graveyard. (The Hindu)

On Tuesday (January 6), a day before the demolition, Justice Amit Bansal heard the plea. The court recorded that the petitioner’s counsel stated there was no grievance regarding removal of the wedding hall or diagnostic centre, both of which had ceased operations.

The judge also noted:

• The MCD’s assurance that no action was proposed on the 0.195 acres containing the mosque and graveyard;
• The absence of any argument that the graveyard extended beyond this leased land.

While issuing notices to the MCD, DDA, and other authorities and seeking counter-affidavits within four weeks, the court declined to grant an interim stay, clarifying that any action taken would be subject to the final outcome of the writ petition (ThePrint).

The Demolition Begins Before Dawn

Although the demolition was scheduled to begin at 8 am on January 7, MCD teams arrived at the site around 1 am, accompanied by extensive police deployment. According to police officials cited by PTI and ANI, nearly 30 bulldozers and 50 dump trucks were mobilised. Heavy police deployment, including riot-control units, were present for the operation.

The Clash: What happened between 12:40 am and 1:30 am

At approximately 12:40 am, shortly after the MCD teams and police reached the area, a crowd gathered near the police barricades at Turkman Gate. Despite prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) — which restricts unlawful assembly — the group allegedly refused to disperse.

According to the FIR lodged at Chandni Mahal Police Station, based on a complaint by Constable Sandeep:

• Around 30–35 people raised slogans against the police administration;
• Several individuals attempted to breach barricades;
• Repeated announcements were made through a loud-hailer directing the crowd to disperse;
• The crowd refused to comply, attempted to break barricades, and began pelting stones;
• One individual allegedly snatched and damaged a police loud-hailer.

The FIR, which contains the version of the police, further states that five police personnel, including the Station House Officer (SHO), sustained injuries during the clash. The injured officers — including Head Constable Jal Singh and Constable Vikram — were taken to Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Hospital, treated, and later discharged (ThePrint, The Hindu).

Police Response: Tear gas and crowd dispersal

Senior police officers told ThePrint that tear gas shells were fired from one side of the mosque complex where stone-pelting was concentrated. The crowd was dispersed within about 30 minutes, after which the demolition commenced around 1:30 am.

Joint Commissioner of Police Madhur Verma stated that minimal force was used and that normalcy was restored shortly thereafter (ANI).

Arrests, FIR sections, and ongoing investigation

Police detained five individuals, including a juvenile. Four adults — Mohd Arib (25), Mohd Kaif (23), Mohd Kashif (25), and Mohd Hamid (30) — were arrested, while a 17-year-old was apprehended (PTI, The Hindu). Additionally, 10–15 individuals were detained for questioning (PTI).

The FIR invokes multiple provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, including:

• Section 221 (obstructing a public servant),
• Section 132 (assault or criminal force to deter a public servant),
• Section 121 (voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant),
• Section 191 (rioting),
• Section 223(A) (disobedience of a lawful order),
• Section 3(5) (joint liability), along with provisions of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984.

Police said CCTV footage, body-worn camera recordings, and social media videos are being examined to identify additional suspects and possible instigators (ANI).

Conflicting Accounts: Locals vs police

Members of the local Aman Committee insisted that residents had cooperated with authorities. Mohammed Shehzad, a committee member, told ThePrint that nearly 150–200 locals had met police and MCD officials in advance, assuring cooperation. “It must have been outsiders,” Shehzad said, arguing that residents would not risk administrative backlash.

However, the FIR contradicts this narrative. Constable Sandeep stated that he recognised at least five local residents among those involved in the violence and claimed he could identify more if produced before him (ThePrint).

Political and public reactions

The incident triggered political reactions across party lines. Congress leader Salman Khurshid said the situation “could have been handled differently” but added that since the court had found the action valid, “nothing else can be said” (ANI).

The BJP accused opposition leaders of justifying violence. Party spokesperson Shehzad Poonawalla criticised remarks by Samajwadi Party leaders who described the stone-pelting as an “action-reaction” (PTI).

Delhi Home Minister Ashish Sood stated that the mosque was untouched and the action was strictly in accordance with court orders (ANI).

Meanwhile, Samajwadi Party MP Mohibbullah Nadvi, who was present in the area prior to the violence, is under investigation. Police said he left before the demolition began but will be summoned to join the probe (ANI).

The larger context and present status

The Faiz-e-Ilahi Masjid had previously drawn attention after CCTV footage showed Dr Umar un-Nabi, accused of being involved in the Red Fort suicide bombing on November 10, 2025, offering prayers there hours before the attack. Authorities, however, have consistently stated that the demolition drive was entirely unrelated to that incident (ThePrint).

As of now:

• The mosque and graveyard remain intact;
• The commercial structures have been demolished;
• Five arrests have been made;
• The High Court has sought replies from authorities, with the matter listed for further hearing in April.

Delhi Police and the MCD maintain that the action was lawful, proportionate, and undertaken strictly under judicial directions, while urging the public not to be misled by misinformation circulating online. Police sources stated that social media posts falsely claiming the mosque itself was being demolished circulated shortly before the violence; and that these posts contributed to people gathering at the site (The Hindu, PTI).

Related:

Cataloguing Communalism: What does the year-long record of hate, violence, and state failure in coastal Karnataka depict

Racist, casteist and communal, when will we as Indians reclaim that lost charade of constitutional decency?

Hate & Intimidation: Teach Bangladesh a lesson akin to what Israel taught Gaza, says BJP Bengal leader Suvendu Adhikari

When the Rule of the Bulldozer Outpaces the Rule of Law: One year after this landmark judgment

Free Speech in India 2025: What the Free Speech Collective report reveals about a year of silencing

The post Faiz-e-Ilahi Masjid, Turkman Gate: A court-ordered demolition, midnight policing, stone-pelting, arrests, and the ongoing legal battle appeared first on SabrangIndia.

While the Supreme Court granted them and activist Shadab Ahmed bail in a controversial order in which it withheld bail from fellow activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam.

Videos were uploaded later by news agencies and outlets but first by their well-wishers who shot busy clips of relatives and friends meeting to celebrate the activists’ freedom after years.

This charming second video recorded an exorbitant Gulfisha greeting supporter as she was shepherded home. “Gulfisha: God is Really Great, I am a Powerful Woman!” She said!

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by News Thali (@newsthali)

Shifa ur Rehman walks free from Tihar Jail after Supreme Court grants bail. His family n friends welcomed him with open arms outside the Tihar Jail.
– A moment of relief and hope for better days ahead. pic.twitter.com/mdl2j7dmDx

— زماں (@Delhiite_) January 7, 2026

VIDEO | Delhi: Accused, Shifa Ur Rehman, who was granted bail by the Supreme Court in the 2020 Northeast Delhi riots ‘larger conspiracy’ case, walks out of Tihar Jail.

The Supreme Court on Monday granted bail to five accused, saying all the accused do not stand on the same… pic.twitter.com/DMXwWhpJPt

— Press Trust of India (@PTI_News) January 7, 2026

VIDEO | Delhi: Mohd. Saleem Khan, one of the accused who got bail in Delhi riots case, reaches his home.

The Supreme Court on Monday granted bail to Mohd. Saleem Khan and four others, saying that all the accused do not stand on the same footing.
Observing that reasonable… pic.twitter.com/4v9gN3D5uY

— Press Trust of India (@PTI_News) January 7, 2026

The following clip of Meeran Haider walking free was uploaded by an organisation identifying itself as IP News.

Meeran Haider walks free from Tihar Jail after Supreme Court grants bail.
– After years of waiting, he steps out to begin a new chapter. May better days lie ahead. pic.twitter.com/v5h9hlJ5ZH

— زماں (@Delhiite_) January 7, 2026

VIDEO | Delhi: Three accused – Gulfisha Fatima, Shifa Ur Rehman, and Meeran Haider, who were granted bail by the Supreme Court in the 2020 Northeast Delhi riots ‘larger conspiracy’ case, walk out of Tihar Jail. The court, on Monday, described the grant of bail as a “calibrated… pic.twitter.com/YVioDOOu7D

— Press Trust of India (@PTI_News) January 7, 2026

Related:

JNU Teacher to her Jailed Students: ‘Be with us again, in freedom, Sharjeel and Umar’

After Five Years in Jail, Bail Still Barred for Two: Supreme Court denies bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in Delhi riots case

Gulfisha Fatima: A saga of arrest and re-arrest

The post Sweet Smiles of Freedom: Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haidar, Mohammad Saleem Khan, and Shifa Ur Rehman walk out of jail appeared first on SabrangIndia.

So it is the historian in me that hopes that the Supreme Court’s decision to deny bail to both Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid as a document will be read ‘against the grain’ perhaps in the not too distant a future. One must today divorce hope from reason in order to this. Such an action is vital to our sanity today.

Those of us who were fortunate enough to be in the Delhi region in late 2019 early 2020, such as myself, were able to witness, if not participate, in one of independent India’s most creative, sustained, non-violent and therefore powerful movements against the Indian state’s intention to restrict definitions of a hard-won citizenship. The movement brought onto the streets, quite literally, large numbers of Muslim women who had rarely participated in public political life, and who sustained their movement for weeks, with little or no overt political support.

This reverberating sound of the National Anthem is the mark of Shaheen Bagh’s love for the country.
India is our nation and we our its citizens.
Come celebrate #JantakaRepublicDay pic.twitter.com/p96NWRngdp

— Shaheen Bagh Official (@Shaheenbaghoff1) January 26, 2020

Is it any wonder that young people were mesmerised by the hopes of that moment, that site, which experimented with new styles and repertoires of protest and communication? Is it any wonder that Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid, given their interest in historical research and their political awareness, were drawn to the movement, like many of their age and background?

Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid were no bomb-throwing revolutionaries. I taught both of them, and they impressed me with their intelligence, diligence and capacity for thinking differently. I did not always agree with the ideas they had. I was often irritated by their style of learning, which bordered on the irreverent. But like most JNU (and CHS) students, they were passionately attached to argument, driven by the elemental hunger to read, write, argue, and speak boldly, sometimes even giddily, of many things that had come into their grasp.

JNU’s mission was to provide that intellectual space where the young could take the risks of thinking, arguing, and arriving at conclusions, even dreams that may remain unrealised. This happened not only in our classrooms, and seminars, but in our canteens, messes, open spaces, and in the wonderful ‘philosophy of the night’ that went on into the wee hours in all our hostels, night after night.

Four years before the anti-CAA/NRC agitation, the media-manipulated vilification of the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) and its student leaders including Umar Khalid and Kanhaiya Kumar was exposed in detail by Sabrangindia in reports that may be read here

Can we fault Sharjeel, Umar, Natasha, or Devangana for dreaming of a better world than the one our generation had left him? Many students from CHS were similarly gripped by the desire to build a new future. Our students enjoyed and appreciated the chance of framing questions, reading sources, and assessing ideas on their own. Some of these were harebrained, some shot through with brilliance. But CHS/JNU fostered spaces where these, and other contrary, ideas could be tried out, adopted, defeated in argument, or abandoned, without fear of reprisal.

Instead, Sharjeel and Umar have been incarcerated for five-plus- one more years of the most creative, productive years of their lives — all because of words they chose to use in public.

On this 75th year of our Republic, we must commemorate figures like Sharjeel and Umar who are paying a heavy price for their speech acts, ideas. We must never forget, that legions of others, who openly called for violence against other Indians, continue to enjoy their freedoms today, and even occupy public office — because they have the right names, and have the right political patrons.

We have become acutely aware of the contradictions that BR Ambedkar had warned us about. He had known that democracy was just top dressing in India. He knew that violent contradictions would erupt when the social structure of our inherently hierarchical, unjust society, undermined the Republic’s hard-won political freedoms and liberties.

As the insightful literary scholar, Rahamat Tarikere, has pointed out, India has a long history of producing some of the loftiest ideas, whether religious or not, but our social practice has never matched these ideals. What chance of a less inequitable world – I hesitate to use the more decisive ‘just’ and ‘equal’ — when the very people who are capable of dreaming that possibility, our young, are forced into a form of social death?

But I am confident that Sharjeel and Umar will emerge from these trials with all their ideals intact. In fact, I am sure, that even behind those prison walls, they think, read, dream, and survive, perhaps even transforming the oppressive space to which they have been condemned. Here I can do no more than cite the brilliant words of Mahmoud Dervish, the Palestinian poet:

It is possible
It is possible, at least sometimes
It is possible especially now
To ride a horse
Inside a prison cell
And run away….

It is possible for prison walls
To disappear,
For the cell to become a distant land
Without frontiers
What did you do with the walls?
I gave them back to the rocks.
And what did you do with the ceiling?
I turned it into a saddle.
And your chain?
I turned it into a pencil.

The prison guard got angry.
He put an end to my dialogue.
He said he didn’t care for poetry,
And bolted the door of my cell.
He came back to see me
In the morning,
He shouted at me.
Where did all this water come from?
I brought it from the Nile
And the trees?
From the orchards of Damascus
And the music?
From my heartbeat

The prison guard got mad;
He put an end to my dialogue.
He said he didn’t like my poetry,
And bolted the board of my cell.

But he returned in the evening:
Where did this moon come from?
From the nights of Baghdad.
And the wine?
From the vineyards of Algiers.
And this freedom?
From the chain you tied me with last night,
The prison guard grew so sad…
He begged me to give him back his freedom.

Be with us again, in freedom, Sharjeel and Umar.

Be with us again, in freedom, Sharjeel and Umar.

(This post by the author, Janaki Nair taught at the Centre for Historical Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University until her retirement in 2020 was posted on social media and may be read here.)

Related:

After Five Years in Jail, Bail Still Barred for Two: Supreme Court denies bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in Delhi riots case

Delhi High Court dismisses bail pleas of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, and others in 2020 Riots Conspiracy Case

Jailed Without Trial: Umar Khalid’s 4-Year Ordeal Ignites Solidarity

The post JNU Teacher to her Jailed Students: ‘Be with us again, in freedom, Sharjeel and Umar’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In a significant order, the Foreigners Tribunal, Dhubri District, has declared Akurbhan Bibi, a marginalised Muslim woman from Assam, to be an Indian citizen in her own birthplace. The decision brings closure to a process that subjected her and her family to prolonged anxiety, uncertainty, and the constant fear of statelessness.

For Akurbhan Bibi, the Tribunal’s declaration is more than a legal outcome—it is the restoration of a life interrupted by suspicion.

Akurbhan Bibi stands with her husband outside their home

Roots in the Borderlands: Birth, marriage, and belonging

Akurbhan Bibi was born in 1982 at Sonakhuli Part II village, under Golokganj Police Station, in Dhubri district, Assam. She grew up on Indian soil, studied at the local school, and lived an ordinary life shaped by the rhythms of a rural border district.

She later married Nur Mohammed, a resident of Ramraikuti village, under the same police station (now under Agomani). Ramraikuti lies in a highly sensitive border area, where the Indo–Bangladesh international fencing stands just a few metres away from residents’ homes.

This region has endured the aftershocks of the 1971 war and Partition-era displacements, yet families like Akurbhan’s have remained rooted here for generations. Their presence is not accidental or recent. As many residents of the border villages assert, they are not Indian by chance, but Indian by choice.

Citizenship by Participation: A voter turned “suspect”

Akurbhan Bibi’s name was enrolled in the electoral rolls in 2005 at her matrimonial home. From that point onwards, she remained a regular voter, exercising her democratic rights year after year.

During this entire period:

• She was never summoned for verification
• No police officer visited her home
• No doubt was raised about her nationality

This long-standing civic recognition was suddenly overturned when she was served a “Suspected Foreigner” notice issued through the Border Branch of the local police station, summoning her before the Foreigners Tribunal.

The notice demanded that Akurbhan Bibi prove her Indian citizenship, placing the entire burden of proof upon her—a requirement that disproportionately devastates poor and marginalised communities in Assam.

A familiar pattern of targeting

Akurbhan Bibi’s case is not an exception; it reflects a broader pattern. Foreigners Tribunal proceedings in Assam frequently target economically vulnerable, Bengali-speaking Muslim families, many of whom lack easy access to archival records, legal assistance, or bureaucratic support.

In Akurbhan’s case, there was no new evidence, no triggering incident, and no intervening conduct that could justify the suspicion raised against her. The notice emerged solely from institutional suspicion—untethered from her lived reality as a voter, resident, and daughter of the soil.

A family history that predates suspicion

Akurbhan Bibi’s paternal lineage is firmly documented. Her father, Saher Sheikh, son of Sonauddin Sheikh, has records tracing back to 1951, with his name appearing in the 1951 National Register of Citizens (NRC)—a foundational document for determining citizenship in Assam. Despite this, Akurbhan herself was forced to defend her nationality, highlighting the intergenerational insecurity imposed on families even when documentary proof exists.

The Notice Arrives: Fear, Absence, and Urgency

When the notice was served, Nur Mohammed was not at home. Like thousands from Assam’s border districts, he survives as a migrant worker, travelling to other parts of India for employment.

Left alone, Akurbhan Bibi carefully read the notice. Understanding its gravity, she acted immediately. Without delay, she contacted CJP’s community volunteer, Hosen Ali, who belongs to her village and is known for assisting families facing such proceedings.

Fear was palpable. The threat of detention, separation, and statelessness loomed large—particularly for a woman with limited means and support.

Akurbhan Bibi and CJP Team Assam

CJP Steps In: Legal Counselling and Ground Support

CJP promptly examined Akurbhan Bibi’s documents and counselled her on the Foreigners Tribunal process. The emotional toll was severe. When Nur Mohammed returned home the very next day, he was visibly shaken.

Detailed consultations followed. CJP assured the family of consistent legal and logistical support, and began the painstaking task of document collection and verification.

The Documentary Challenge: Searching for 1966 records

One of the most critical challenges was tracing Akurbhan Bibi’s father’s name in the 1966 electoral rolls. Given that her father was 23 years old at the time of the 1951 NRC, it was reasonable to expect his inclusion in the 1966 voter list. However, repeated searches yielded no result—not even the Election Office in Dhubri could locate his name.

Importantly:

• The names of her paternal uncles (her father’s brothers) were present in the 1966 voter list
• This reinforced the family’s long-standing residence in the area

While pursuing these records, CJP gathered additional crucial documents, including land records, which later became decisive evidence before the Tribunal.

The legal battle before the Foreigners Tribunal

On behalf of CJP, legal team member Ishkander Azad represented Akurbhan Bibi before the Foreigners Tribunal, Dhubri.

The legal strategy focused on:

• Establishing pre-1971 ancestry
• Demonstrating linkage between Akurbhan and her father
• Corroborating residence through multiple independent documents

After evaluating the evidence, the Tribunal passed an order declaring Akurbhan Bibi to be an Indian citizen.

What the Tribunal Order holds

In its order, the Foreigners Tribunal, Dhubri, inter alia:

1. Accepted the 1951 NRC entry of Saher Sheikh, father of Akurbhan Bibi, as a valid and credible legacy document
2. Accepted the linkage between Akurbhan Bibi and her father, based on documentary evidence placed on record, establishing that she is the daughter of the person whose name appears in the 1951 NRC
3. Took note of supporting documents, including land records and collateral family documents, which corroborated continuous residence and ancestry in Assam
4. Did not draw any adverse inference from the absence of the father’s name in the 1966 voter list, particularly in light of:
   • the presence of close family members in the 1966 rolls, and
   • systemic gaps in archival records
5. Held that the proceedee had successfully discharged the burden of proof cast upon her under the Foreigners Act and Tribunal procedure
6. Declared Akurbhan Bibi to be an Indian citizen, and accordingly dropped the reference against her

 
Akurbhan Bibi and her husband with CJP Team Assam

Justice Delivered: A cup of tea and a quiet smile

The order copy was personally handed over to Akurbhan Bibi by CJP’s Dhubri district community volunteer, Habibul Bepari, along with Assam State In-charge Nanda Ghosh. Holding the order in her hands, Akurbhan Bibi smiled—a rare, unguarded smile of relief. She requested the team to wait for a while. She wanted to prepare tea.

It was a simple act, but one that spoke volumes.

She thanked CJP repeatedly. Her husband stood beside her, visibly lighter, as though a long-standing fear had finally loosened its grip.

CJP stood with her—when it mattered most.

Why the Tribunal’s order matters

1. Burden of proof and structural inequality: Foreigners Tribunal proceedings place the burden of proof entirely on the individual, often ignoring the realities of poverty, displacement, and archival gaps. Akurbhan Bibi’s case demonstrates how this burden disproportionately impacts marginalised women.

2. Recognition of legacy documents: The Tribunal correctly acknowledged the probative value of:

• The 1951 NRC entry of her father
• Land records and collateral family documentation
• Linkage evidence, even in the absence of a 1966 voter record for her father

This reflects judicial consistency with established FT and High Court jurisprudence.

3. Absence of adverse inference: Importantly, the Tribunal did not draw adverse inference from the non-availability of the 1966 voter list entry—recognising systemic record gaps rather than penalising the proceedee.

4. Gendered vulnerability in citizenship proceedings: The case highlights how women—especially migrant workers’ spouses—are uniquely vulnerable when notices are served in the absence of male family members.

5. Constitutional significance: The declaration reaffirms:

• Article 14 (Equality before law)
• Article 21 (Right to life and dignity)
• The principle that citizenship cannot be stripped through suspicion alone

The complete order may be read here.

Related:

Humanity over Technicalities: SC ensures return of pregnant woman and child deported in June sweep

“All I Wanted Was Peace”: How 55-year-old widow Aklima Sarkar won back her citizenship

When Erosion Stole Her Home, a Foreigners’ Notice Tried to Steal Her Citizenship: Hamela Khatun triumphs over foreigner tag

From Despair to Dignity: How CJP helped Elachan Bibi win back her identity, prove her citizenship 

The post Born in the Shadow of the Indo–Bangladesh Border, Raised as Indian, Questioned as a Foreigner: The citizenship battle of Akurbhan Bibi appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The official who spoke to the media, The Times of India and NDTV said Asha Santosh Kiranga (24), resident of Aaldandi Tola in Etapalli taluka in Gadchiroli district, was nine months pregnant.

“Her native Aaldandi Tola village is cut off from the main road, with no delivery facilities available there. The patient, hoping for timely help, set out on January 1 with her husband, trudging 6 kilometres through jungle paths to her sister’s home in Petha. However, the ordeal in her heavy, advanced stage of pregnancy took a toll on her body,” he said.

“On the morning of January 2, she began experiencing severe labour pains. She was rushed by ambulance to Kali Ammal Hospital in Hedri. Though the doctors decided on a caesarean operation, it was too late by then. The baby had already died in the womb. Due to rising blood pressure, the woman too passed away soon after,” the official said. When the media contacted authorities for information, Gadchiroli District Health Officer Dr Pratap Shinde said the woman had been registered through the ASHA workers.

“The sudden labour pains and complications likely arose due to walking. Doctors tried to save her, but were unsuccessful. A detailed report has been called for from the taluka health officer, and the matter will be investigated,” he said.

(Except for the story were published from a syndicated feed)

Related:

Gadchiroli: Four-and-a-half-year-old tribal girl raped by peon of a primary health unit, physicians missing, left bleeding for several hours without medical attention

Labour rights, health of workers hit in the name of “reform”: PUCL Maharashtra

The MVA promise to uphold right to healthcare in Maharashtra: A visionary approach to equitable and comprehensive health access

The post Gadchiroli, Maharashtra: Pregnant Woman walks 6 km from village for childbirth, dies appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The verdict was delivered by a Bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice N.V. Anjaria, which held that although prolonged incarceration demands constitutional scrutiny, the statutory embargo under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA continued to operate against Khalid and Imam, as the prosecution material disclosed a prima facie case against them.

At the same time, the Court stressed that all accused are not on the same footing, and that a role-specific, accused-specific analysis was constitutionally necessary even in conspiracy cases — a principle that led to bail being granted to the remaining five appellants.

The judgment was reserved on December 10, 2025, and arises from appeals challenging the September 2, 2025 judgment of the Delhi High Court, which had denied bail to all seven accused.

‘Qualitatively Different Footing’: Why bail was denied to Khalid and Imam

Reading from the operative portion of the judgment, the Bench made it clear that it had “consciously avoided adopting a collective or unified approach”, instead undertaking an independent examination of the role attributed to each accused.

According to LiveLaw, the Court recorded its satisfaction that the prosecution material, if taken at face value as required at the bail stage, disclosed a “central and formative role” played by Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the alleged conspiracy behind the February 2020 violence in Northeast Delhi.

“The material suggests involvement at the level of planning, mobilisation and strategic direction, extending beyond episodic or localised acts,” the Court observed.

On this basis, the Bench concluded: “This Court is satisfied that the prosecution material discloses a prima facie allegation against the appellants Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam. The statutory threshold under Section 43D(5) stands attracted qua these appellants. This stage of the proceedings does not justify their enlargement on bail.”

As reported by Bar & Bench, the Court cautioned that to disregard the distinction between central roles and facilitatory roles would itself result in arbitrariness, even in cases alleging a common conspiracy.

However, the Court clarified that Khalid and Imam may apply for bail afresh either:

• after the examination of protected witnesses, or
• after the completion of one year from the present order.

Both accused have now been in custody for over five years, without the trial reaching the stage of recording evidence.

Arguments raised by the defence

1. Umar Khalid: ‘No violence, no presence, no terrorist act’

During the hearings, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Umar Khalid, mounted a sustained challenge to both the factual foundation and the legal characterisation of the allegations.

As reported by LiveLaw, Sibal had argued that there was no evidence linking Khalid to any act of violence, and emphasised that Khalid was not even present in Delhi when the riots broke out. According to the defence, this fact alone fatally undermined the allegation that Khalid played any operational role.

A central plank of the prosecution case rested on a speech delivered by Khalid in Amravati, Maharashtra. Sibal read out portions of the speech to demonstrate that Khalid had expressly called for non-violent, Gandhian methods of protest.

“We will not answer violence with violence… We will meet violence with non-violence,” Sibal quoted from the speech.

Sibal argued that calls for “chakka jams” or road blockades are legitimate forms of civil disobedience in a democracy, and that such methods have historically been employed across political movements, including the farmers’ protests, without being labelled as terrorism.

Specifically challenging the invocation of the UAPA, Sibal submitted that Section 15 cannot be stretched to criminalise protest activity, and that even highway or rail blockades do not amount to “terrorist acts” unless accompanied by a clear intent to threaten the country’s economic security or sovereignty. To do otherwise, he warned, would dangerously collapse the distinction between dissent and terrorism.

Despite these submissions, the Supreme Court held that at the bail stage, it could not weigh defence rebuttals, and confined its enquiry to whether the prosecution material, taken at face value, crossed the statutory threshold.

2. Sharjeel Imam: ‘In custody during riots, speech is not violence’

Appearing for Sharjeel Imam, Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave similarly argued that the prosecution’s case was built on attribution and inference rather than direct evidence.

According to Bar & Bench, Dave pointed out that Imam was already in custody in other cases at the time the riots occurred, making it impossible for him to have participated in any on-ground violence or mobilisation.

Dave acknowledged that Imam’s speeches may have been controversial or unpalatable, but argued that political speech, however provocative, does not automatically amount to incitement to violence. He cautioned against equating dissenting or radical speech with terrorist intent.

He also flagged the danger of pre-trial stigmatisation, noting that Imam had been branded an “intellectual terrorist” by the State despite there being no conviction or completed trial.

The prosecution, however, relied heavily on video clips of Imam’s speeches, particularly those in which he spoke about cutting off the “Chicken Neck” or Siliguri corridor, the narrow passage connecting the Northeast to the rest of India.

As reported by LiveLaw, the Delhi Police alleged that these speeches showed an intent to:

• paralyse the functioning of the State, and
• attract international attention during the visit of then US President Donald Trump in February 2020.

The Supreme Court accepted that these allegations, taken at face value, were sufficient at the bail stage to constitute a prima facie case, while clarifying that it was not expressing any final opinion on guilt.

Bail Granted to Five Accused: Liberty with stringent conditions

In contrast, the Supreme Court granted bail to Gulfisha Fatima, Meeran Haider, Shifa Ur Rehman, Mohd. Saleem Khan and Shadab Ahmed, holding that their continued incarceration could not be justified on parity with Khalid and Imam.

For Gulfisha Fatima, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi made a pointed submission, reported by LiveLaw, that keeping students and young activists in jail for over five years without the trial even beginning makes a “caricature of our criminal justice system”.

Singhvi highlighted that co-accused Devangana Kalita, Natasha Narwal and Asif Iqbal Tanha were granted bail in 2021 on similar allegations, yet Fatima continued to remain incarcerated.

While granting bail, the Court clarified that the relief does not dilute the allegations. According to LiveLaw, the Bench imposed twelve stringent bail conditions, warning that any misuse of liberty would permit the trial court to cancel bail after hearing the accused.

Details of the judgment pronouncement

1. UAPA and Bail: Delay is not a ‘trump card’, says Court

One of the most closely analysed portions of the judgment concerns the relationship between prolonged incarceration and bail under UAPA. Justice Aravind Kumar observed, as reported by LiveLaw, that in prosecutions under special statutes like the UAPA:

• delay in trial cannot function as a “trump card” that automatically overrides statutory restrictions on bail.

However, the Court simultaneously acknowledged that:

• delay serves as a trigger for heightened judicial scrutiny, especially where incarceration is prolonged.

The Bench clarified that Section 43D(5) does not completely oust judicial scrutiny, and courts must conduct a structured enquiry, limited to:

1. whether the prosecution material, if accepted at face value, discloses a prima facie offence;
2. whether the role attributed to the accused has a reasonable nexus with the alleged offence; and
3. whether the statutory threshold for denial of bail is crossed.

Crucially, the Court reiterated that defence arguments and rebuttals cannot be examined at the bail stage, reinforcing the asymmetrical nature of bail adjudication under the UAPA.

2. Article 21, speedy trial and the limits of judicial intervention

The judgment repeatedly returns to Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty.

Justice Kumar noted that:

• pre-trial incarceration cannot be equated with punishment, and
• the right to a speedy trial is an integral facet of Article 21.

At the same time, the Bench held that in UAPA cases, Article 21 must operate within the statutory framework, and that the Court cannot substitute legislative judgment merely because detention is prolonged.

As reported by Bar & Bench, the Court stated that: “The UAPA as a special statute represents a legislative judgment as to the conditions on which bail may be granted at the pre-trial stage.”

This formulation, while doctrinally consistent with prior UAPA rulings, has been read by legal observers as reinforcing the exceptional nature of liberty under anti-terror laws, even where trials remain stalled for years.

3. Broad reading of ‘terrorist act’ under Section 15

The Supreme Court also rejected a narrow interpretation of Section 15 of the UAPA, holding that “terrorist acts” are not confined to physical violence or loss of life.

According to LiveLaw, the Court held that the provision also covers acts that:

• disrupt essential services, or
• threaten economic stability.

The statutory scheme, the Court noted, extends culpability even to preparatory and organisational acts, significantly broadening the scope of UAPA prosecutions.

Directions to expedite trial

Recognising the constitutional implications of prolonged incarceration, the Supreme Court directed the trial court to ensure that the examination of protected witnesses proceeds without delay, and that the trial is not unnecessarily prolonged. However, the Court did not fix any outer time limit for completion of the trial.

Context: Five years of incarceration

The case arises from the February 2020 communal violence in Northeast Delhi, which left 53 people dead, hundreds injured, and large-scale destruction of property.

Over the last five years, the Delhi Police has pursued a “larger conspiracy” theory, focusing largely on student activists and organisers of anti-CAA protests — an approach that has drawn sustained criticism from civil liberties groups.

Notably, as reported in Indian and international media, a group of US lawmakers recently wrote to Indian Ambassador Vinay Mohan Kwatra, expressing concern over Umar Khalid’s prolonged pre-trial detention, highlighting the growing global scrutiny of the case.

Today’s ruling reinforces a consistent judicial position that while individual differentiation among accused is constitutionally necessary, the UAPA’s elevated bail threshold continues to operate as a near-insurmountable barrier for those alleged to occupy “central” roles — even after half a decade of incarceration without trial.

It leaves unresolved the deeper constitutional question that continues to haunt UAPA prosecutions: at what point does prolonged pre-trial detention itself become punishment?

Related:

The Word is the World: How the Delhi riots conspiracy case ritualises silence

How the Delhi riots case remains stagnant with close to a dozen student leaders incarcerated

5 Years of Delhi Riots: Some Punished, Some Rewarded!

Delhi Police on Trial: Three court orders reveal collusion, cover-ups, and custodial torture by police officers during 2020 Delhi riots

Delhi Riots 2020: Umar Khalid withdraws plea from Supreme Court citing “change in circumstances”

Hate speeches amplified by television, incited targeted violence against Muslims: CCR Report, Feb ‘20 Delhi riots

The post After Five Years in Jail, Bail Still Barred for Two: Supreme Court denies bail to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in Delhi riots case 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.

Meanwhile, two Kashmiri vendors were allegedly harassed and threatened with dire consequences in separate incidents in Haryana over the past two days. A First Information Report (FIR) has been registered in one of the incidents. The incident of two Kashmiri vendors who faced harassment in Haryana emerged through a video depicting the same from Kaithal’s Kalayat, a local man speaking in Haryanvi dialect is heard confronting the vendor sitting on a concrete bench asking him to chant “Vande Matram”. Superintendent of Police, Kaithal, Upasana told The Hindu over phone that the police took suo motu cognisance of the matter to register a case two days ago and efforts were on to identify the accused, who was not seen in the video. In another incident, a man, in another video, is seen holding a Kashmiri vendor by his collar in Haryana’s Fatehabad asking him to chant “Bharat Mata Ki Jai”. A woman is also seen in the video trying to intervene and reason with the man to let off the vendor. Fatehabad SP, Siddhant Jain said both, the vendor and the man, were brought to the police station and the man was “counselled”. “We have asked the vendor to file a formal complaint to initiate legal action,” said Mr. Jain. He said the incident took place on December 28.

The quaint phenomenon of Kashmiri shawl sellers moving all over India with their goods is decades old in several parts of urban India. The phenomenon of their being under attack is however recent given the climate of hate incidents in the country.

The JKSA has urged that the Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi, and Chief Minister of Himachal Pradesh, Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu intervene immediately.  “Dozens of Kashmiri shawl sellers, who have been working in Himachal Pradesh for over 25-30 years, are now being harassed, assaulted, and threatened to leave the State in the Ghumarwin area of Bilaspur district by right-wing groups. This is the 17th such incident that occurred in Himachal Pradesh this year,” JKSA head Nasir Khuehami said. “This atmosphere of hatred and threats has the potential to destroy livelihoods built over generations,” Mr. Khuehami said.

The JKSA, which has been documenting the cases of harassment against Kashmiris, said shawl sellers were being asked to leave Himachal Pradesh. “They are not allowed to sell their shawls, their belongings have been vandalised, and even their mobile phones were smashed when they tried to record these incidents,” Mr. Khuehami said.

He said the incidents were taking place “despite having proper verification and valid documents”. “We further urge the Union Home minister to take immediate and decisive action by directing the authorities to register cases against the fringe and right-wing elements involved under the relevant provisions of law. Strict action will send a strong message that communal bigotry has no place in a progressive and inclusive society,” the JKSA said.

Jammu and Kashmir Pradesh Congress Committee (JKPCC) president Tariq Hamid Karra said he spoke to the Himachal Chief Minister and raised the issue of the harassment of Kashmiri shawl sellers. “He [the Chief Minister] assured of strict action,” Mr. Karra said.

Meanwhile, the All India Professionals’ Congress (AIPC), Jammu and Kashmir Chapter, condemned these incidents. “Targeting people because of their Kashmiri identity goes against the idea of India. Students, professionals, traders, and workers from Jammu and Kashmir have been living and working across the country for decades and have contributed to local economies and institutions,” said Sanjay Sapru, head of AIPC Jammu and Kashmir.

The AIPC chapter urged the State governments and the Union government “to take clear and strong steps to ensure the safety of Kashmiris living outside the union territory”.

Related:

Amid over 17 attacks, Kashmiri Students Abandon Studies or Live in Fear

Pahalgam attack sparks nationwide turmoil, Kashmiri students face a chilling wave of hate across India

Kashmiri students allege attacks in AMU, write to Shah for probe

The post Himachal Haryana, racial harassment and attacks on Kashmiri shawl sellers rage on appeared first on SabrangIndia.

There has been outrage at official complicity and silence, that no FIR was filed for days after the attack. Social media Zindabad. CM Pushkar Dhani (BJP) called Anjel Chakma’s father and publicised the conversation on X. There has been outrage at the prevalent concealment of the crime itself till it resulted in death. Yet, Dehradun’s Senior Superintendent of Police, Ajai Singh has been quick to state on Monday, December 22 that “there is no evidence, prima facie, of racial attack.” The clear lapses and subsequent outrage include a three-day delay in registering the First Information Report (FIR), the refusal by the Selakui police station personnel to register the complaint on multiple occasions, the failure of the police to invoke appropriate sections of the law at the initial stage, and attempts by senior police officials to dilute the crime by portraying it as a fight while ignoring elements of racial abuse.

But should not we, as Indians, ask ourselves, if we are not inherently racist, casteist and communal? Students or professionals, Delhi, Kolkatta, Degradun, Bengaluru, Chennai or Mumbai, who hail from any of the seven states in the north-east face, have faced and have always faced attacks, ostracisation and slurs. I can give examples from the 1980s from the university of Mumbai, 32 years later from 2012, when 3,000 migrant and gig workers tried to flee Chennai, Benagluru and Pune over threats and attacks. Or in between before and after. When this inherent othering was seen in brute communal attacks, first against groups, then against individuals. Muslims, Sikhs, Christians. The civilizationally sanctioned othering of our Dalits, the everyday rape and killings of Dalit women is a reality that crept on to news pages only after the 1990s somehow. Though it has existed forever. Angel Chakma’s brute killing is no worse than Mohammad Aklaq’s (Dadri, 2015) or Surekha and Priyanka Bhotmage (Khairlanji, 2006). Listing or mapping these could run like a gruesome litany, Indian calendar of hate.

Such manifest attacks after humiliation, (1980s, 2006, 2012) however elicited a seminally different response from officialdom. Or mostly. Things were attempted to be brought back on track by an overall adherence to the “rule of law” and “principles of equality and non-discrimination underlined in the Indian Constitution.” Despite gross lapses (Nellie 1983, Delhi, Kanpur 1984, Bombay 1992-1993, Gujarat 2002) in official response the veneer that society accepted or adopted was one worn by the state. A clear and conscience driven adherence to the Indian Constitution. Even if substantive justice or reparation was never quite done. We were, until 2014, a constitutional republic in the shaping and making.

Something sharply changed then, however.

No regime or administration –until 2014 –was headed by outliers who brazenly signalled to cops and officials that “those who are violent” can be identified by “their clothes” or attire. Those holding constitutional posts did not legitimise terms that slur or stigmatise particular groups or communities. Today this is par for the course. We did not have heads of state(s) that proudly espoused sectarian divide and privilege. It is this, the prevalent and dominant a politics ideologically powered on stratification and othering that has brought out the worst in us.

There are enough of us Indians who are civilizationally brutalized into othering that welcome the prevailing, politically endorsed politics of hate and violence that results in Anjel’s tragic demise. Enough in the populace to cheer the hate-leaders on. Even as those very institutions of constitutional governance, naively constructed to act as check on the executive running awry, fail us, fail India seminally.

As 2026 beckons, the rest of us Indians face a stark challenge. To meet this mob cheering hate cheerleaders, head on. To demonstrate, creatively with numbers that there are enough –and more– on our side too. Scared, scattered, maybe. Those that have forever battled stratification and divide from centuries back. Reclaim our homes, streets, schools, neighbourhoods. Do this with stories, songs, protests, meetings, marches. On beaches, parks and highways. Never mind if the panchayats, assemblies, parliament take a while. To ensure not just that we have no Anjels, no  Priyanka, no Junaids whose lives are taken before they have begun to really live. And to most of all break the shackles of all imprisonments free.

Related:

Peaceful street protest in Mumbai condemns Christmas-time attacks on Christians across India

Not Merry, Not Free: What the attacks on Christmas say about India’s shrinking pluralism

Jharkhand: Another case of mob lynching of Muslim man

Rising Menace: Mob lynchings escalate as vulnerable Muslims and minors face grave danger

The post Racist, casteist and communal, when will we as Indians reclaim that lost charade of constitutional decency? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

मैं दिल्ली हाईकोर्ट गेट नंबर 5 के बाहर उन्नाव रेप पीड़िता के न्याय के लिए खड़ी हूँ। चुप रहना अपराध है।#UnnaoRapeCase #JusticeForUnnaoVictim pic.twitter.com/xfePXbLpTu

— Yogita Bhayana योगिता भयाना (@yogitabhayana) December 26, 2025

These protests have taken place amid grave concerns expressed by the Unnao rape survivor and her family over the suspension of the BJP politician, Sengar’s jail term. Responding to the high court order, the survivor told Hindustan Times, “I am extremely upset by what has happened today in the court.” She also said she felt “extremely unsafe” after learning about the bail conditions granted to Sengar.

Additionally, speaking to ANI news agency on Friday, the victim’s mother expressed strong objection to the bail, saying, “His bail should be rejected… We will knock on the doors of the Supreme Court. We have lost faith in the high court… If we don’t get justice in the Supreme Court, we will go to another country… The person guilty of my husband’s murder should be hanged immediately.”

It is only after this determined expression of the need for justice, public outrage and protests from December 21-24 that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), announced its late evening decision on December 25, 2025 to appeal this suspension of sentence and bail to Sengar, BJP leader and former MLA.

Photographs shared by the news agency showed security personnel asking protesters to put an end the demonstration immediately, warning that legal action would be taken if they did not disperse within five minutes. Women’s rights activist Yogita Bhayana, who was present at the protest, said, “Women across India are deeply hurt that the sentence of a rapist has been overturned. This happened in this very court. So, we will seek justice from the same place where the injustice occurred,” ANI reported.

Yet another protester told ANI, “On what grounds was Kuldeep Sengar granted bail, when it was declared that he had committed rapes and murders? If a life sentence was given to him, then why is he out?… We demand that the rapist should go behind bars so women feel safe.”

Kuldeep Sengar was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in December 2019 for the rape of a 17-year-old girl in Uttar Pradesh’s Unnao in 2017. On Tuesday, the Delhi High Court suspended the expelled Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader’s life sentence, noting that he had already served more than the maximum punishment prescribed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

An earlier protest in the capital was also met with forcible eviction by the Delhi police.

एक गैंगरेप पीड़िता के साथ ऐसा व्यवहार उच्चित है???

उसकी यही गलती है कि न्याय की माँग कर रही है ?

ये कैसा न्याय है ???#JusticeForUnnaoVictim pic.twitter.com/F1mSmOhQEs

— Yogita Bhayana योगिता भयाना (@yogitabhayana) December 23, 2025

CRPF Intimidation?

The court’s judgement has triggered fresh fears within the survivor’s family, despite the order barring Sengar from coming within a five-kilometre radius of her. The survivor’s family has also been granted protection by the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF). However, controversy has also been generated over the politicisation of this para-military protection including political interference, when earlier this week, the survivor and her family were trying to travel by road to Delhi to meet with advocates. According to an interview played out on social media she told activist and supporter Yogita Bhayana that initially the CRPF tried actively to prevent her travelling to Delhi for legal advice and redressal and only when she raised her voice in objection “was she allowed.” This raises serious questions on the active monitoring and interference in witness protection ordered by the court especially since the para-military forces like the CRPF come under the union home ministry.

Listen to the video on this tweet

पीड़िता के साथ ऐसा व्यवहार gazab – आप खुद सुनिए उन्नाव गैंगरेप पीड़िता को

निःशब्द….#JusticeForUnnaoVictim pic.twitter.com/StjZiCxbMA

— Yogita Bhayana योगिता भयाना (@yogitabhayana) December 24, 2025

The survivor cited past incidents to explain her concerns, saying, “He is a powerful man. He would get his men to do his dirty work for him. When my car met with an accident in which two of my relatives and my lawyer died in 2019, Sengar didn’t do it himself. His henchmen did. Now that he is out, we are all unsafe.”

Now 24, the survivor is a resident of Delhi. Following the grant of conditional bail to Sengar, she has been provided court-ordered protection and is accompanied by five to 11 Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) personnel at all times. However, her mother has said that security cover provided to her and her three children until March this year (2025) was subsequently withdrawn.

Related:

Delhi HC grants bail pending appeal to Unnao rape convict Kuldeep Singh Sengar

Unnao rape case: Kuldeep Singh Sengar convicted

Ex-BJP MLA Kuldeep Sengar, brother convicted in Unnao rape survivor’s father’s death

The post Protest outside Delhi HC gate over bail in Unnao rape case, survivor’s mother asks for maximum punishment appeared first on SabrangIndia.