The morning of the scheduled hearing of the matter in the Supreme Court today, March 21, an affidavit filed by the State of Assam, detailed the status of 270 individuals detained in its deportation centres. The affidavit provides an extensive breakdown of detainees’ identities, dates of detention, case statuses, and the progress of deportation procedures. It also highlights whether the necessary travel permits have been secured and if deportation has actually taken place.

Details provided in the affidavit

A substantial number of detainees remain in custody despite long periods of confinement, with, the earliest example of a detainee having been incarcerated since 2012. The document reveals that only ten individuals have been deported thus far, with some cases pending clearance from diplomatic channels, with the Ministry of External Affairs, India and Bangladesh High Commission. As crucial, as the affidavit admits, several are subject matter of legal appeals, with their challenges to the status of “foreigner” status unilaterally handed down by the state’s controversial Foreigner tribunals, still pending in Gauhati High Court. The question then arises whether they should have figured on any list at all!

Among these is the case of Ajabha Khatun, supported by the Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP), who’s deportation has been stayed by the Gauhati High Court on March 3, following an intervention application filed by her in the Supreme Court (see details below) in the present case.

Therefore, according to the data provided, of the 63 detainees that the Union government had (insubstantially, without evaluating evidence or status) claimed to be in line for deportation, 5 have been granted conditional bail and have been released from the Matua Transit Camp on the basis of the orders passed by the Gauhati High Court. The affidavit also provides that a total of 11 detenues have been granted travel permits by the Assistant High Commissioner of Bangladesh, paving the way for their deportation from India to Bangladesh. However, only 10 out of these 11 detenues have been actually deported to Bangladesh. The deportation of the last detenue could not take place as the Authorities across the border were concerned for a discrepancy in stated Father’s name of said detenue. It is critical to highlight here that these 11 people who have been deported to Bangladesh are not from the original list of 63 persons that the union government had deemed to be from Bangladesh. 

Shockingly, of the 63 detainees, that the state had earlier claimed were ‘in line for deportation,’ the state has now stated in its affidavit that 33 of these have their petitions pending in the Constitutional Courts. Each of them has initiated legal proceedings against their declaration as illegal migrants by Foreigners Tribunals. As per the affidavit, 29 such proceedings are pending before the Gauhati High Court, and 4 remain pending before the Supreme Court.

Additionally, the affidavit details the steps taken for deportation, including:

1. Issuance of National Status Verification (NSV) requests: The NSV format has been sent to the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) for all 270 detainees for further diplomatic engagement with foreign governments, primarily Bangladesh.
2. Reminder letters and follow-ups: The state has sent multiple reminder letters, with the most recent batch dated February 2, 2025.
3. Travel permit requests: Only eleven have had their travel permits issued, out of which ten have been successfully deported.

Despite these efforts, the affidavit underscores that deportation remains a sluggish process, hindered by bureaucratic red tape and international cooperation hurdles. Additionally, it is pertinent to highlight that the detainee list reveals that a significant portion of those confined in Assam’s deportation centres are Bengali-speaking Muslims, a demographic that has long been at the centre of Assam’s citizenship debates. Several cases include elderly individuals, women, and even minors who have been detained alongside their family members

The case of Ajabha Khatun

It is crucial to point out that the affidavit records Ajabha Khatun (serial no. 18), whose case is being fought by Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP), as having her petition pending in the Gauhati High Court. Ajabha Khatun, detained in September 2024, was declared a foreigner by the Foreigners Tribunal No. 1, Barpeta in an ex parte order issued in 2019. On March 3, 2025, the Gauhati High Court stayed her deportation after noting the procedural irregularities in her case. Her name had been included among 63 individuals marked for deportation by the Union government, despite her pending legal challenge. The stay by the Gauhati High Court was granted following an Intervention Application (IA) was filed before the Supreme Court in the ongoing Rajubala Das case, and the top court directed her to seek interim relief from the High Court. A division bench comprising Justices Kalyan Rai Surana and Malasri Nandi issued a notice returnable on April 4, 2025, directing the Union of India, the State of Assam, the NRC authority, and the Election Commission to respond. The court also requisitioned relevant records from the Foreigners Tribunal to further decide the case.

Ajabha Khatun’s case exemplifies the systemic issues within Assam’s Foreigners Tribunal framework. Her citizenship status has been contested since 1997, when her name was arbitrarily removed from electoral rolls. The tribunal disregarded crucial evidence, including voter lists featuring her family members, and imposed an undue burden of proof on her. Beyond procedural lapses, her indefinite detention at Matia Transit Camp raises serious human rights concerns under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The order of the Gauhati High Court may be accessed here.

Challenges in the deportation process

The affidavit submitted by the State of Assam provides crucial insights into the realities of deportation centres in India. It highlights a system mired in bureaucratic inertia, legal complexities, and diplomatic constraints. While Assam continues to process deportations through formal channels, the sheer number of 270 detainees languishing in prolonged detention points to an urgent need for judicial and legislative scrutiny. The information provided underscores the necessity of addressing due process concerns, human rights violations, and the broader implications of Assam’s citizenship policies. The affidavit inadvertently exposes the inefficiencies within the deportation system. Several critical roadblocks include:

• Prolonged delays in nationality verification: Many detainees remain in limbo as diplomatic negotiations fail to yield timely responses.
• Legal entanglements: A significant number of detainees are engaged in lengthy legal battles, further slowing down the process.
• Limited diplomatic cooperation: The process relies on responses from foreign governments, particularly Bangladesh, which has not always been forthcoming in acknowledging deportation requests.

Related:

Gauhati HC stays deportation of Ajabha Khatun, seeks Tribunal records for review of FT’s order declaring her foreigner

Victory at Last: Micharan Bibi’s citizenship restored after year-long struggle

Ajabha Khatun, among the 63 facing detention in Assam, seeks Supreme Court intervention, emphasis on pending legal remedies

Looking back at 2024: Constitutional Court rulings that undermine justice and accountability

Hate speech allegations on the campaign trail: CJP Files complaints with State EC against Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma’s Jharkhand remarks

The post Assam govt to SC: 33/63 of those marked for ‘deportation’ are contesting ‘foreigner’ status in courts appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Arrests: a pre-planned action to neutralise leadership

Kisan Mazdoor Morcha (KMM) leader Sarvan Singh Pandher and Samyukta Kisan Morcha (Non-Political) leader Jagjit Singh Dallewal were detained while they were en-route back to their respective protest sites after a meeting with the union government in Chandigarh. The meeting, which involved Union Ministers Piyush Goyal, Shivraj Singh Chouhan, and Pralhad Joshi, ended inconclusively as the Union had dismissed the farmers’ data supporting their demand for a Minimum Support Price (MSP) law.

The Punjab police, which had been trailing the farmer leaders since their departure from the meeting, acted swiftly as soon as they entered the state. Dallewal, who has been on a hunger strike since November 2023, was detained from his ambulance near Zirakpur, while Pandher was taken into custody in Mohali. Other farmer leaders, including Abhimanyu Kohar, Kaka Singh Kotra, and Manjit Singh Rai, were also detained and transported to separate locations. The decision to apprehend them away from the protest sites was a calculated move by the authorities to prevent an immediate backlash at the encampments.

A government under pressure: The industrial factor behind the crackdown

Until recently, the Punjab government had refrained from using force against the protesting farmers, despite multiple rounds of failed negotiations. However, the tide turned after former chief minister, Arvind Kejriwal, who was in Punjab at the time, reportedly received strong pushback from industrialists in Ludhiana. Traders and business leaders warned that the prolonged blockade at Shambhu and Khanauri was causing significant economic disruptions,  potentially jeopardising AAP’s chances in the upcoming Ludhiana West Assembly by-elections.

On the night of March 20, top functionaries of the Punjab government and AAP had met industry leaders, after which the decision to remove the protest sites was finalised. As per a report of the Tribune, this sequence of events suggests that economic interests played a pivotal role in the sudden shift in Punjab’s handling of the protests. Rather than standing firm in support of the farmers, as it had done in the past, the AAP government chose to prioritise the concerns of businesses over the demands of agricultural workers, effectively betraying a constituency that had largely supported the party in previous elections.

Police operation: dispersal under the cover of darkness

By late Wednesday, the police moved in with a heavily coordinated strategy. As per multiple media reports, over 7,000 officers from various districts, along with riot control vehicles, water cannons, and cranes, were deployed to execute the operation. Authorities also cut off electricity at both protest sites, forcing officers to use torches for visibility. Protesters at the Khanauri site reported that they had no means to communicate as internet services had been curtailed, preventing them from sharing images or videos of the police action.

Despite the heavy police presence, farmers initially remained defiant. However, faced with overwhelming numbers, many eventually boarded buses voluntarily, while others were forcibly removed. As per the report of The Indian Express, Patiala Deputy Inspector General of Police Mandeep Singh Sidhu addressed the protesters, stating, “We are over 3,000, and you are only a few hundred. We have to clear the sites, come what may.”

Political reactions: AAP faces backlash for its ‘betrayal’

The opposition wasted no time in condemning the AAP government for its actions. Congress MP Amarinder Singh Raja Warring accused both the Punjab and union governments of deliberately isolating Punjab’s farmers. Former Chief Minister Charanjit Singh Channi and Union Minister of State Ravneet Singh Bittu also criticised the heavy-handed approach, with Bittu questioning why AAP, which had earlier claimed to stand with the farmers, had now turned against them.

Interestingly, while political leaders criticised the crackdown, industrialists hailed it. A report of The Tribune provided that Badish Jindal, president of the World MSME Forum, described the police action as a “welcome step,” arguing that punishing the farmers for disrupting business was necessary. This contrast in reactions further underscores the economic motivations behind the Punjab government’s sudden crackdown.

The farmers’ perspective: broken trust and continued struggle

For the protesting farmers, the crackdown represents a deep betrayal. Their demands—including a legal guarantee for MSP, debt waivers, and pensions for farm labourers—have been repeatedly dismissed or delayed by the union government. Despite over a year of protests, the union government has yet to take decisive action. Instead of meaningful engagement, the latest negotiations ended with the union questioning the legitimacy of the farmers’ financial estimates, while a next round of talks was scheduled for May 4.

A report in the Hindustan Times suggests that, the Punjab government’s narrative that the farmers should protest in Delhi rather than in Punjab, has also been met with scepticism. When the Punjab Finance Minister Harpal Singh Cheema defended the police action by stating that the protests were hurting Punjab’s economy, farmers pointed out that their grievances were ignored even when they attempted to engage in talks. The real issue, they argue, is not the location of the protests but the government’s unwillingness to implement structural reforms that would secure their livelihoods.

What beholds the future of the farmers’ movement?

The Punjab government’s crackdown may have cleared the protest sites, but it has also ignited a deeper resentment among farmers, whose trust in AAP has been severely shaken. Far from ending the movement, the heavy-handed action could strengthen resistance in the coming months, especially with crucial negotiations looming. If the government believes that force and industry-backed coercion will silence the demands of Punjab’s farmers, history suggests otherwise.

This episode underscores a troubling pattern: when economic and electoral pressures mount, governments—regardless of their professed allegiance to farmers—quickly abandon them in favour of more influential interests. By choosing to align with industrialists over the agrarian community, the AAP government has not only exposed its shifting priorities but has also set a dangerous precedent where dissent is managed through suppression rather than dialogue.

Related:

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

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 Arresting dissent: Punjab Government’s U-turn on farmer protests, protest site bulldozed, farmer leaders detained appeared first on SabrangIndia.

• Data Principal: The individual whose personal data is collected and used. A user on a marketplace like Amazon.
• Data Fiduciary: The entity that collects, processes, and manages personal data responsibly. A marketplace like Amazon.

Principles of the DPDP Act

The DPDP Act is built upon six core principles that guide its approach to data protection:

1. Lawful, Fair, and Transparent Usage: Organizations must use personal data in a manner that is lawful, fair, and transparent to the individuals concerned.
2. Purpose Limitation: The use of personal data should be limited to the purpose for which it was collected.
3. Data Minimisation: Only the necessary personal data required for the specified purpose should be collected.
4. Accuracy: Reasonable efforts should be made to ensure the accuracy and up-to-date nature of personal data.
5. Storage Limitation: Data should be stored only for the duration necessary for the stated purpose.
6. Security: Reasonable safeguards must be implemented to prevent unauthorized access, processing, and data breaches.

The draft rules have been published to realize these principles and the provisions of the Act. The period for submitting comments and feedback on the rules ended on March 5, 2025.

Key Provisions in a nutshell

The Draft DPDP Rules provide detailed guidance on various aspects of data protection, including notice and consent, security safeguards, data breach notification, and data retention. Some of the key provisions are:

• Clear and concise notices
• Reasonable security safeguards
• Data breach notification
• Time restrictions on data storage

Notice and consent

The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 and the Draft Rules, 2025, place emphasis on informing Data Principals before processing their personal data, especially when consent is the legal basis.

Section 5(1) of the Act mandates that any request for consent under Section 6 must be accompanied or preceded by a notice from the Data Fiduciary.

To ensure understanding, Section 6(3) requires that the consent request be in clear and plain language, offering the option to access it in English or any language in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution. It must also include contact details for a Data Protection Officer or another authorised person.

Rule 3 of the Draft Rules further details the notice requirements, stipulating that it must be:

• Understandable independently of other information (Rule 3(a)).
• Provide a clear and plain account of the necessary details for informed consent, including an itemised description of the personal data and the specified purpose with an itemised description of the goods, services, or uses (Rule 3(b)).
• Include the communication link to the Data Fiduciary’s website or app and other means for the Data Principal to withdraw consent (with comparable ease), exercise their rights, and make a complaint to the Board (Rule 3(c)).

Reasonable security safeguards

The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 mandates that Data Fiduciaries must protect personal data by taking reasonable security safeguards to prevent breaches [Section 8(5)]. The Act also outlines exemptions under certain conditions in Section 17. Specifically, Section 17(2) (b) states that the Act’s provisions do not apply to processing necessary for research, archiving, or statistical purposes if such processing adheres to prescribed standards.

The Draft Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025, further detail these obligations in Rule 6 (“Reasonable security safeguards”), requiring Data Fiduciaries to implement, at a minimum:

• Rule 6(1)(a) Encrypting, obfuscating, or masking data to prevent unauthorized access.
• Rule 6(1)(b) Controlling access to computer systems handling the data.
• Rule 6(1)(c) Monitoring and logging data access to detect, investigate, and prevent breaches.
• Rule 6(1)(d) Ensuring backup and recovery in case of data loss or compromise.
• Rule 6(1)(e) Retaining logs and data for at least one year to detect and prevent unauthorized access.
• Rule 6(1)(f) Including security requirements in contracts with Data Processors.
• Rule 6(1)(g) Implementing technical and organizational measures to enforce security safeguards.

Data breach notification

In the event of a personal data breach, the draft rules mandate a swift and transparent notification process. As per Rule 7 of the Draft Rules, the Data Fiduciary must, without delay, inform each affected Data Principal in a clear and plain manner about the nature and extent of the breach, the likely consequences, the measures implemented to mitigate risk, and the safety measures the Data Principal can take. Crucially, Rule 7(1) (e) also requires the provision of business contact information for a person able to respond on behalf of the Data Fiduciary. Furthermore, Rule 7(2) of the Draft Rules stipulates that the Data Fiduciary must intimate the Data Protection Board of India upon becoming aware of a breach. This initial intimation should include a description of the breach, and a more detailed report must follow within 72 hours, or a longer period if permitted by the Board. This subsequent report must contain broad facts, circumstances and reasons leading to the breach, mitigation measures, findings regarding the responsible person, remedial actions, and a report on the intimations given to Data Principals.

Erasure of personal data when consent is withdrawn

When a Data Principal decides to withdraw their consent for the processing of personal data, the draft rules necessitate its erasure, unless legal obligations dictate otherwise. Specifically, Rule 8(1) of the Draft Rules states that a Data Fiduciary processing personal data for relevant purposes specified in the Third Schedule must erase such data if the Data Principal does not contact the Data Fiduciary for the specified purpose or exercise their rights for the relevant time period stipulated in that Schedule, provided its retention is not required by law. For significant digital platforms like e-commerce entities and social media intermediaries with not less than two crore registered users in India, this time period is three years from the date the Data Principal last contacted the Data Fiduciary for the specified purpose or exercised their rights, or the commencement of the Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025, whichever is later.

Necessity to inform principals of the erasure so that they can take action to retain

To ensure Data Principals are aware of impending data erasure and can take necessary steps if they wish to retain their data, Rule 8(2) of the Draft Rules imposes an obligation on Data Fiduciaries. They must inform the Data Principal at least forty-eight hours before the expiry of the period for erasure. This notification will alert the Data Principal that their personal data will be erased upon the completion of this period unless they log into their user account or otherwise contact the Data Fiduciary for the performance of the purpose or exercise their rights.

Provisions for vulnerable groups like personal data of children, persons with disabilities, etc.

The draft rules include specific safeguards for the personal data of vulnerable groups. Rule 10 of the Draft Rules mandates that a Data Fiduciary must adopt appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure that verifiable consent of the parent is obtained before processing any personal data of a child. This rule also requires due diligence to check that the individual identifying themselves as the parent is indeed an adult. For processing the personal data of a person with a disability who has a lawful guardian, Rule 10(2) similarly requires due diligence to verify that such guardian has been appointed by a competent authority under applicable law. Furthermore, the Fourth Schedule (Part B) of the Draft Rules provides specific exemptions from the requirements of subsections (1) and (3) of section 9 of the Act(Section 9 (3) of the Act prohibits processing of personal data that could have detrimental effect on the well-being of the child) for processing the personal data of a child for certain purposes, such as the exercise of any power or function in the interests of a child under any law, or for providing subsidies or benefits to a child. These exemptions are subject to the condition that the processing is restricted to the extent necessary for such purposes.

Consent managers

The draft rules establish a framework for the registration and obligations of Consent Managers. Rule 4 of the Draft Rules outlines the process for a person to apply to the Board for registration as a Consent Manager, requiring them to fulfil the conditions set out in Part A of the First Schedule. These conditions include being a company incorporated in India with sufficient technical, operational, and financial capacity, including a minimum net worth. Upon registration, Consent Managers are subject to obligations specified in Part B of the First Schedule. These obligations include ensuring that the personal data is made available or shared in a manner that its contents are not readable by the Consent Manager, maintaining records of consents and notices, providing Data Principals access to these records, acting in a fiduciary capacity, and avoiding conflicts of interest with Data Fiduciaries.

Data processing by the state

The draft rules permit the State and its instrumentalities to process personal data for specific purposes in the public interest. Rule 5(1) of the Draft Rules allows for the processing of a Data Principal’s personal data to provide any subsidy, benefit, service, certificate, licence or permit that is provided or issued under law or policy or using public funds. However, Rule 5(2) specifies that such processing must be done following the standards outlined in the Second Schedule. These standards include ensuring that processing is carried out in a lawful manner and for the specified uses, is limited to necessary personal data, is done while making reasonable efforts to ensure accuracy, and that personal data is retained only as long as required. The Second Schedule also mandates reasonable security safeguards, providing business contact information of a person able to answer questions about processing, specifying the means for Data Principals to exercise their rights, and ensuring accountability of the person determining the purpose and means of processing. Similar standards apply to the processing of personal data necessary for research, archiving or statistical purposes.

Concerns

The rules have drawn criticism for potentially breaching fundamental data protection principles such as purpose limitation and proportionality, particularly due to the broad exemptions granted to government agencies for processing data related to subsidies and public services without adequate safeguards. Concerns have also been raised about increasing executive influence over the Data Protection Board of India through the appointment process, which could compromise its independence and objectivity. This is critically important since State has already been given a special treatment under the act and yet, there is no effort to make the preliminary adjudicating body like the Data Protection Board more independent.

Additionally, the mandatory data retention requirements for certain entities have sparked concerns about excessive data collection and heightened surveillance risks. Lastly, Rule 22, which grants the Central Government extensive access to data, is seen as bypassing key surveillance safeguards and the criminal justice system, posing significant privacy risks. Its broad and ambiguous language, including terms like “sovereignty and integrity of India,” grants the government the power to demand data from Data Fiduciaries without clear notification protocols. The absence of restrictions on data retention heightens fears of indefinite storage and potential misuse. Transparency is further compromised as Fiduciaries are prohibited from disclosing government requests, weakening accountability. Moreover, the government’s ability to exempt itself from key data protection regulations threatens privacy, allowing unrestricted data collection without user consent or adequate legal justification.

Conclusion

The establishment of consent managers represents an innovative approach to managing individual autonomy in an era where data collection has become omnipresent. Special protections for children and vulnerable groups demonstrate a recognition of differential risks in our digital ecosystem.

However, the shadow of a dystopian future looms large. The broad exemptions granted to government agencies for processing data related to public services and subsidies create concerning possibilities for expanded state surveillance under the guise of public interest. The mandatory data retention requirements for significant digital platforms raise questions about the long-term storage of sensitive information and the potential for mission creep in data usage.

India stands at a crossroads where the path forward is neither predetermined nor inevitable. The Draft DPDP Rules contain within them the seeds of both surveillance and freedom. The ultimate direction will be determined by how these rules are interpreted, enforced, and amended in response to real-world consequences. The coming years will test whether India can navigate this complex landscape to create a digital society that respects both innovation and individual rights. 

(The author is a legal researcher with the organisation)

Related:

India at the Crossroads: The delimitation exercise and its implications for democracy

Catch people’s attention on pollution narrative: “Switching to public transport can lower your heart attack risk by 10%.”

Electoral Trusts Scheme: Utter non-transparency in political funding & an unholy nexus between big corporate giants and major political parties

The post Draft DPDP Rules, 2025, seeds of both surveillance and freedom appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The case against them stems from a video posted on their X (formerly Twitter) account, in which a man, who was a farmer, allegedly made derogatory remarks about the Telangana Chief Minister. The complaint, filed by the chief of the Congress’ state social media unit, alleged that the video was intended to incite unrest and was part of a deliberate attempt by Pulse News to defame the CM. The police claimed that the video was shot at the Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) headquarters and suspected a political conspiracy behind its release. A third individual, the user of an X account named “NippuKodi”, is also under police scrutiny and detention.

Despite the court rejecting the organised crime charge, it upheld other provisions under the Information Technology Act and the BNS related to creating and circulating false information. However, the manner in which the Telangana Police acted—conducting pre-dawn raids and arresting the journalists in a way that reeks of political vendetta—has drawn sharp criticism from various quarters.

Arrest under questionable circumstances

The Telangana Police’s handling of this case has raised serious concerns about the misuse of power. Revathi was arrested from her home at 5 AM on March 12, a move reminiscent of the authoritarian crackdowns of the Emergency era. In a video posted before her arrest, she warned, “Cops at my doorstep! They want to arrest me. They may pick me up and take me. One thing is clear: Revanth Reddy wants to put pressure on me and my family and threaten me.”

DON’T SHARE THIS VIDEO PLEASE!!!
CASES WILL BE FILED

Here is a video of my team @pulsenewsbreak speaking to an old man.
He expresses his frustration about various issues, in his own language.

NOW! The Telangana Congress is busy filing cases and Telangana police are… pic.twitter.com/gQYWhmseG5

— Revathi (@revathitweets) March 11, 2025

According to the police, the arrests were justified because the journalists’ conduct was highly provocative and could have disturbed law and order. The public prosecutor opposed their bail, arguing that the police required more time for investigation. However, Jakkula Ramesh, the lawyer representing Revathi and Thanvi, dismissed the allegations, claiming that the police had acted under political pressure. He pointed out that none of the other charges carried a punishment exceeding seven years, making the immediate arrests unwarranted and disproportionate. The court appeared to agree, striking down Section 111, ruling that it was unjustified at this stage.

Revanth Reddy’s threats against criticism and the press

What makes this case even more troubling is the response from Chief Minister Revanth Reddy himself. Days after the arrests, he lashed out at social media criticism in the Assembly, warning that strict action would be taken against those engaging in “defamatory propaganda under the guise of journalism.” He went even further, making an openly threatening remark, stating that those who crossed the line would be stripped and paraded.

His words reveal a deep hostility towards independent journalism and suggest that his government is willing to weaponise the law to silence critics. As per Hindustan Times, CM Reddy stated: “We will respond to such criminals as required. If they hide behind a facade, that veil will be removed, and they will be exposed. Don’t create a spectacle. I am also a human being… We will act strictly according to the law and will not exceed any limits.”

Such statements, coming from a sitting Chief Minister, indicate a dangerous shift towards authoritarianism, where journalists who criticise the government risk being treated as criminals.

Widespread condemnation of the arrests

The arrests have provoked a massive backlash, particularly from the Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS), which accused the Congress government of being intolerant of dissent. K.T. Rama Rao, former minister and senior BRS leader, compared the situation to the Emergency, calling the arrests a “blatant attack on press freedom”. In a post on X, he wrote:

“It feels like a state of Emergency has returned in Telangana… Is this the democracy you talk about, Rahul Gandhi? Arresting two women journalists in the wee hours of the morning! What is their crime? Giving voice to public opinion on the incompetent and corrupt Congress government?”

In the “Mohabbat Ki Dukaan” land where @RahulGandhi Ji’s nominated CM himself is the Abuser in Chief !! https://t.co/KpNtiSBs8L

— KTR (@KTRBRS) March 16, 2025

Other BRS leaders, including T Harish Rao and Kalvakuntla Kavitha, also condemned the Telangana government’s actions. Harish Rao questioned whether Telangana was turning into a dictatorship, stating, “Revanth Reddy’s government responds to questions with arrests.”

Beyond political figures, civil society groups and journalist organisations have also condemned the arrests. The Editors Guild of India (EGI) issued a strongly worded statement, criticising the police’s pre-dawn operation and calling it a serious attack on press freedom. Rajya Sabha MP Kapil Sibal, a former Congress leader, also denounced the move, saying:

“Arrest is not the solution. It is the result of a contagious disease called intolerance.”

Telangana

Arrests two journalists for criticising CM for spreading falsehood inciting divisions to disturb law and order

Really ?

Arrest is not the solution

It is the result of a contagious disease called :

Intolerance !

— Kapil Sibal (@KapilSibal) March 13, 2025

Police seizures and allegations of misconduct

Adding to concerns about police excesses, the Hyderabad Police raided the Pulse News office in Madhapur, seizing:

• Two laptops
• Two hard disks
• Seven CPUs
• Other digital equipment

Revathi’s lawyer alleged that the police misbehaved with the two journalists and that the judge had taken note of these police excesses. Such actions suggest that the police were not merely conducting an investigation but sending a message—a warning to other journalists to fall in line or face similar treatment.

Congress’ hypocrisy on press freedom

The Telangana Congress, which has long positioned itself as a defender of democracy and free speech, has now exposed its own hypocrisy. The same party that has often accused the BJP of suppressing journalists is now following the same playbook—using state power to silence criticism.

Congress leaders have tried to defend the police, claiming that the journalists had links with the BRS and had been spreading propaganda against the government for the past two months. However, this justification falls flat in the face of the arbitrary nature of the arrests, the timing before the Assembly session, and the pre-dawn raids—all hallmarks of a politically motivated crackdown.

Conclusion: A dangerous precedent being set in Telangana

The arrest of Revathi and Thanvi Yadav is not an isolated case; it is a frightening signal of what may become a pattern of repression under the Revanth Reddy-led Telangana government. By allowing the police to act in such a brazenly authoritarian manner, the Congress government has shown that it is willing to undermine press freedom to protect its own image.

This incident sets a dangerous precedent. If journalists can be arrested simply for sharing an opinion or amplifying public grievances, then no critical media outlet is safe. The Telangana government must be held accountable for this unjustifiable attack on press freedom, and civil society must push back against this increasingly repressive environment.

If this trend continues, Telangana risks becoming another state where journalists must operate under fear, where the government dictates what can and cannot be said, and where the basic tenets of democracy are trampled in the name of political survival.

Related:

Delhi High Court’s takedown order against Shyam Meera Singh’s video on Isha Foundation raises free speech concerns

The murder of Raghvendra Bajpai: A chilling reminder of the dangers faced by journalists in India

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

Indian Newspaper Day: Journalists’ Groups Demand Independent Media Commission

Baster Journalist killing: UNESCO condemned the killing of Mukesh Chandrakar 

The post Telangana journalists granted bail after court strikes down ‘Organised Crime’ charge appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The recent order of the Delhi High Court directing YouTuber Shyam Meera Singh to remove his video critical of Isha Foundation and its founder, Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev, raises significant questions about the balance between free speech and the right to reputation. The court’s decision, passed as an ex-parte ad-interim order without providing Singh an opportunity to present his case, highlights the increasing use of defamation laws to curtail criticism and investigative reporting.

The court directed Google LLC (YouTube), X Corp, and Meta to remove the video from their platforms. Singh was further restrained from sharing or publishing the video in any form, and the court went a step further by barring the general public from re-uploading it. This sweeping injunction raises concerns about the breadth of judicial power in restricting digital content before a full trial.

The order states “Defendant No.4, his associates, servants, agents, affiliates, assignees, substitutes, representatives, employees and/or persons claiming through him [are restrained] from creating, publishing, uploading, sharing, disseminating, etc., the defamatory videos.”

The court justified its decision by stating that Singh’s video was based on “unverified material” and that its title was “clickbait to attract public attention.” It also noted that the video directly impacted the reputation of the Isha Foundation and its founder, stating that allegations of improper practices at the ashram harmed their public standing. However, Singh’s response highlights a procedural issue: he was only served with a copy of the defamation suit after the order had already been passed, denying him the chance to contest the allegations before the injunction was issued.

Justice Prasad also observed that Singh had made social media posts to promote the video before uploading it. The Court pointed out the need to balance free speech with the right to reputation. The order stated that “It is well settled that reputation is an integral part of the dignity of each individual and there is a need to balance between freedom of speech and freedom of expression vis-a-vis the right to reputation which has been considered as a part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The video does have a direct impact on the reputation of the founder of the Plaintiff/Trust.”

The order may be viewed here.

Ex-parte orders and the right to be heard

Singh, in his response to the court order, pointed out that he was served a copy of the defamation suit only after the order had already been passed.

A statement on behalf Meera said, “…Hon’ble High Court has passed the ex parte (without giving an opportunity of hearing) ad-interim order directing that the said video be taken down. The order has been complied with. It is categorically stated that Shyam Meera Singh has been served with the copy of the suit, only after the said order was passed.”

“The said ex parte ad- interim order prima facie appears to be arbitrary and not in consonance with law. Therefore, Shyam Meera Singh is exploring all the legal remedies available before him,” it further said.

I came to know through the media that yesterday, the Hon’ble High Court passed an interim order to take down my video. I was not served with any notice nor provided with any information about this hearing. Further, I was not given an opportunity to present my side in the court. I…

— Shyam Meera Singh (@ShyamMeeraSingh) March 13, 2025

Statement on behalf of @ShyamMeeraSingh pic.twitter.com/9xtQtQrGza

— Mayank Yadav (@imayankyadav) March 12, 2025

This raises a crucial issue: the principle of audi alteram partem, which guarantees the right to be heard before an adverse order is issued. While courts can grant ex parte relief in exceptional cases where immediate harm is evident, it is difficult to see how this case justified such urgency. The Isha Foundation’s claim that the video was uploaded two days before Maha Shivratri to create a public controversy does not, in itself, establish the kind of imminent harm that would warrant bypassing Singh’s right to respond.

Defamation cases, particularly those involving public figures or organisations of significant influence, require careful judicial scrutiny. Courts have historically recognised that public figures are subject to higher levels of criticism and scrutiny. In this case, the Isha Foundation is a well-known institution with considerable public influence, making it all the more important for the judiciary to ensure that Singh’s right to critique its activities is not unduly curtailed.

Balancing reputation and free speech

The court’s rationale—that the video’s contents “directly impinge upon the reputation of the Plaintiff in the eyes of the general public”—raises broader concerns about how defamation laws are applied. Reputation is undoubtedly a significant right, but it must be weighed against the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression, especially when the subject matter concerns public interest.

In India, the Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that the right to reputation, while important, cannot be used to shield public figures from criticism. In Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India (2016), the Court upheld criminal defamation but also emphasised that the right to reputation should not be invoked to silence fair criticism. The present case, however, suggests a broad interpretation of defamation that could have a chilling effect on investigative reporting and critical journalism.

Implications for digital journalism and public discourse

This is not the first instance of judicial intervention affecting Singh’s content. In January 2025, the Delhi High Court ordered him to remove a video about Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh, citing prima facie defamation. In that case, however, the court allowed Singh to upload a new video with a disclaimer stating that its contents were sourced from a trial court judgment and a book. The difference in approach between the two cases underscores the need for clear judicial guidelines on how courts handle online defamation claims.

The broader concern is the potential chilling effect on digital journalism. If courts continue to grant takedown orders before assessing the validity of defamation claims, independent journalists and content creators may become hesitant to investigate or report on powerful figures and institutions. Such orders, even if later reversed, can discourage critical reporting due to the financial and legal burdens involved.

Related:

The murder of Raghvendra Bajpai: A chilling reminder of the dangers faced by journalists in India

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

Indian Newspaper Day: Journalists’ Groups Demand Independent Media Commission

Baster Journalist killing: UNESCO condemned the killing of Mukesh Chandrakar

The post Delhi High Court’s takedown order against Shyam Meera Singh’s video on Isha Foundation raises free speech concerns appeared first on SabrangIndia.

According to reports, the controversy began when a local resident associated with the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) accused a teenage boy of raising so-called “anti-India” slogans during the cricket match. The allegations, based on overheard statements, led to a gathering of people outside the minor’s residence, creating a volatile atmosphere. Subsequently, the Malvan police registered an FIR against the boy and his parents, leading to their arrest. The municipal authorities then took swift and arbitrary action by demolishing their scrap shop without issuing a prior notice. Further revelations indicated that the residence of the boy’s paternal uncle was also demolished without following legal procedures.

SHRC Order Highlights Violations of Due Process and Rule of Law

As per the IE, taking suo-moto cognisance of the reports, the SHRC issued a strongly worded order, stating that a preliminary reading of the news items indicated a prima facie violation of legal due process. The order categorically noted that “the principles of rule of law, which form the foundation of democratic governance, have been flouted in this case.”

Reportedly, the commission also observed that the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Indian Constitution, which protect individuals from arbitrary state action, had been severely compromised. It further emphasised that the criminal justice system, which requires a legal process to determine guilt, had been bypassed, with the administration usurping judicial functions. The order underlined that such actions violated the doctrine of separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution, which is recognised as part of its basic structure.

The SHRC’s observations align with the Supreme Court’s November 2024 ruling, which explicitly directed that no demolition should take place within 15 days of a show-cause notice being issued unless the structure in question was an unauthorised construction in a public space such as a road or street. The fact that no such notice was served in this case suggests a blatant disregard for established legal safeguards.

The commission has sought a fact-finding inquiry report from the Sindhudurg district collector and the Superintendent of Police regarding the incident. A division bench comprising retired Justice Swapna Joshi and former IPS officer Sanjay Kumar is set to hear the matter.

Procedural lapses and political influence

It had also come to light that the MSHRC had been without a chairperson and member at the time the reports were first published on February 25, 26, and 27, 2025. The suo-motu cognisance was taken only after the new appointments were made, underscoring a delayed but necessary response from the human rights body.

The controversy erupted when Sachin Varadkar, a self-identified VHP worker, alleged that he had overheard the 15-year-old making “anti-national” remarks while riding past the boy’s home on his motorcycle. He later confronted the boy and escalated the matter by filing a police complaint. Within days, police had arrested the boy’s parents and detained the minor, sending him to an observation home. Meanwhile, the Malvan municipal authorities, reportedly acting on complaints from locals and a letter from Shiv Sena MLA Nilesh Rane, razed the family’s scrap shop. The demolition reportedly took place without official bulldozers, raising concerns that vigilante groups may have been involved.

Municipal Chief Officer Santosh Jirge initially justified the demolition, claiming that the scrap shop was an “unauthorised structure” and was obstructing traffic. However, further scrutiny revealed that the structure had been demolished the same day a complaint was received, without any due notice or legal verification. Jirge later admitted, as per the IE report, that no official record was available to determine when the structure was built, further exposing the arbitrary nature of the demolition. (Detailed story may be read here.)

Political backing and the role of the state

The demolition was openly endorsed by Shiv Sena MLA Nilesh Rane, who posted images of the razed shop on social media, boasting about the swift action taken against what he described as “a Muslim migrant scrap dealer.” Rane’s post suggested a communal motive behind the action, as he vowed to expel the family from the district. This raises serious concerns about the weaponisation of state machinery to target marginalised communities under the pretext of maintaining law and order.

Meanwhile, the arrested parents were eventually released on bail, and police have indicated that they will be filing a chargesheet against them. The charges, filed under Sections 196 (promoting enmity between groups), 197 (imputations prejudicial to national integration), and 3(5) (acts with common intention) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, carry a maximum sentence of three years’ imprisonment.

Implications and the road ahead

The SHRC’s intervention in this case is a critical step towards holding the administration accountable for its actions. The commission’s preliminary observations highlight the dangerous precedent set by demolishing properties as an extrajudicial form of punishment. The incident underscores the increasing use of punitive demolitions against minority communities, a practice that has been widely criticised by human rights groups.

Many have pointed out that the incident reflects broader trends of erosion of due process, where municipal bodies, under pressure from political figures, carry out demolitions to appease majoritarian sentiments. The involvement of a right-wing MLA in publicly celebrating the demolition raises concerns about the fusion of political influence and administrative action in targeting vulnerable communities.

The SHRC’s demand for a fact-finding inquiry, if done without any political influence, will be pivotal in determining accountability in this case. If the commission’s final report confirms procedural lapses, it could set a legal precedent for challenging similar demolitions carried out under questionable circumstances. Additionally, it could serve as a test case for reinforcing the legal requirements surrounding demolition procedures, particularly in cases where communal and political factors appear to be at play.

Related:

A 15-year-old boy “accused”, family shop and home demolished in direct contravention of SC orders?

FIRs for hate speech registered against BJP MLAs Nitesh Rane and Geeta Jain: Maharashtra Police to Bombay High Court

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

The post Maharashtra Human Rights Commission probes Malvan demolitions after suo moto cognisance appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Mumbai police, which investigated the case, found a three-page ‘suicide note’ in which Tadvi had, in detail, described her ordeal and the failure of the medical institution T.N. Topiwala National College and B.Y.L. Nair Hospital, to stop the brutalities inflicted upon her and several other Dalit and Adivasi students.

In the suicide note, Tadvi named Bhakti Mehare, Ankita Khandelwal, and Hema Ahuja – her seniors at the gynaecology department in the medical school. She said they had harassed and humiliated her over her tribal identity. She also named Yi Ching Ling, the then-unit head of the gynaecology department at T.N. Topiwala National College and B.Y.L. Nair Hospital – where Tadvi was studying in 2019 – for not taking her complaint seriously.

A week ago, the special court hearing the case in Mumbai allowed the special public prosecutor Pradeep Gharat’s application to add Yi as an accused in the case. Special Judge S.M. Tapkire, on February 28, issued summons to Yi and ordered:

“The impleaded/added accused Dr. Yi Ling Chung Chiang be tried together with the trio of charge-sheeted accused.”

The court directed that summons be issued to her and instructed the investigating officer to submit a report by the next date, March 20.

The court’s order came after the public prosecutor moved an application seeking criminal charges against Yi, who according to Tadvi (through her suicide letter) and her family had ignored a serious complaint of harassment. One might imagine that the state government was in agreement with this move. But on March 7, a notification was issued and Gharat was suddenly replaced with another senior public prosecutor. No explanation was given.

This opens the matter up to the speculation that the state government did not want Yi’s name added to the case, and Gharat was replaced because he did not seek the state government’s approval on this move.

Gharat, however, says such permission was not needed in the first place. “Once you are appointed as an officer of the court, it is your responsibility to decide the course of the trial. My application was based on the anti-ragging committee’s report and also the family’s position from the start,” Gharat says.

This is not the first case in which Gharat has been removed. Prior to this, he was suddenly shifted out of other cases involving BJP leaders like Nitish Rane, Narayan Rane, Navneet Rana, and Mohit Kamboj. “I had moved applications and sought strict actions in these cases too. It wasn’t surprising that I was removed from these cases when the Mahayuti government came into power,” Gharat says.

He expresses concern about the decision to remove him from Tadvi’s hearing. “The community (Bhil Tadvi tribe) to which Payal belonged rarely sees a woman reach higher education. She was a role model for many other children like her, but the system killed her,” he says.

Although Gharat was appointed as a special public prosecutor in the case by the state government, his name for the post was suggested by the Tadvi family and their lawyer. As per the rules under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, it is mandatory for the states to let the victim’s family have a say on the choice of the prosecutor. The Maharashtra state government too has issued a notification in 2016 allowing the victim and their family to have a say in the appointment of the public prosecutor. Tadvi’s mother, Abeda, had written a letter to the then tribal development minister Kagda Chandya Padvi (under the Mahavikas Aghadi government) requesting Gharat’s appointment.

Advocate Disha Wadekar, who is representing the family in the higher courts, says that the practice of the victim’s family choosing a lawyer in atrocity cases is very common and has helped prove atrocities in many cases. And in cases where the families have not been able to get their own lawyer, the cases have barely made any progress – “like, for instance, the institutional murder of Rohit Vemula at Hyderabad Central University,” Wadekar says.

Wadekar, along with another lawyer, Nihalsing Rathod, was appointed by the Rajasthan government to represent the state in the rape and subsequent suicide of a 17-year-old student. This appointment, Wadekar notes, also occurred through the family’s request. “Getting a perfectly qualified lawyer removed from the case would disrupt the trial,” Wadekar says.

With: Abeda Tadvi, a cancer survivor who has doggedly followed the case from the start and taken it up to the Supreme Court, has now written to chief minister Devendra Fadnavis demanding that Gharat be reappointed. “Advocate Gharat has been handling the case for 3-4 years now and has closely studied it. With him as the public prosecutor, we are hopeful that justice will be done… I request you to bring Advocate Gharat back into the case and allow him to handle it until justice is served,” Abeda Tadvi has written in the letter.

Courtesy: The Wire

The post Payal Tadvi’s Case: Maharashtra Govt Replaces Prosecutor Who Moved to Add HoD to Chargesheet appeared first on SabrangIndia.

A 3,500 sq km salt marsh, LRK encompassing Kutch, Patan, Surendranagar, Banaskantha and Rajkot is crucial for inland salt production, contributing one-third of the country’s supply. It is also a key source of ginger prawn exports. Despite such unique contributions, there has hardly been any government effort to ensure dignity of life for the workforce here — one of its manifestations being in the form of medical conditions caused by lack of menstrual hygiene.

There are six salt zones in LRK, where the Scheduled Caste community of Agariyas toil for eight months of the year. During the monsoon period between June and September, the area sees saltwater ingress from the Gulf of Kutch. When the monsoon time ends, worker families arrive mainly from four neighboring districts of Surendranagar, Patan, Rajkot and Kutch and settle in makeshift sheds for the next eight months.

Water scarcity is a silent predator in LRK, birthing a cascade of health crises stemming from lack of menstrual hygiene. Jauriben Chhotabai, a salt worker in Surendranagar, attests this, so do Jalpa (18) who suffers from infections and white discharge and Vimla who deals with painful urination.

If neglected, lack of menstruation hygiene can lead to toxic shock syndrome, reproductive tract infections and other vaginal diseases. Excruciating abdominal pain, medically termed as painful cramps, accompany these conditions. Bhartben Shailbhai (19), a salt pan worker from Gosana village in Dasada taluka of Surendranagar district, has been going through it every month for the past three years. According to her, medical treatment has not helped.

“The pain begins in my lower abdomen and spreads to my back and thighs,” she says, her voice heavy with despair.

“Once trapped in an infection, liberation from it seems incredibly difficult. The lack of water prevents proper cleaning of private parts. Using the same cloth repeatedly after washing during menstruation makes their problem even more severe,” notes Jairambhai Devabhai Savalia, the secretary of Narayanpura Cooperative Society at Patdi in Dasada taluka.

Women work in salt pans for more than 10 hours a day. Those leasing salt pans enter into verbal agreements with ancestral producers, ensuring a share of salt revenue. Heenaben Jagabhai Khakariya (24) from Kesariya village of Lakhtar taluka in Surendranagar district claims that she has not been able to seek treatment for dysmenorrhea due to her demanding job. She tried traditional methods like carom seeds in lukewarm water to relieve pain, but without much effect.

Pankti Jog, an advocacy coordinator at JANPATH, a collaborative forum based in Ahmedabad, remarks that the struggles of women workers in LRK does not end with water scarcity. “They have severe menstrual hygiene management challenges due to lack of hygiene resources such as clean water, soap, sanitary pads and toilets, leading to infections and waterborne diseases,” she says.

No government medical facilities are available in LRK. However, there are primary health centres (PHCs) in Kutch, which function well. Even if they somehow get access to these PHCs, the women workers will not make use of them, thanks to the stigma surrounding menstruation and unwillingness to consult male doctors.

A duty forgotten

Dr Viren Dosi from Bhansali Trust has been serving the salt workers of Santalpur in Patan district for two decades. He stresses that providing free water is the duty of state government. Yet, Agariyas are left parched in most areas of LRK.

“In Surendranagar, water charges are based on salt production units (paatas), costing Rs 900 per month. Tankers deliver only 500 litres every five to seven days, forcing families to ration every drop. Women suffer the most, with inadequate water exacerbating menstrual hygiene struggles,” says Sahiya from Bhalot village of Kutch’s Anjar taluka.

“Bathing is a once-a-week affair; utensils are washed with the same water for days,” shares Ramaben from Patdi in Surendranagar. With no government water supply, the Agariya community is forced to rely on private tankers that charge Rs 1,200 to Rs 1,500 for 500 litres.

Speaking to 101Reporters, Dr RB Singh, Taluka Health Officer, Santalpur, highlights state’s efforts to improve menstrual health in LRK, “where a mobile medical van visits salt workers weekly”. While sanitary pads are distributed, challenges like limited water availability and infrequent visits from health units remain. The health workers try to visit at least once in 10 days, but local weather, uncertain temperature and dusty winds pose problems.

On menstrual health issues, the health department officials simply say that they are spreading awareness. When asked about the lag in capacity building, they outright refuse to acknowledge the truth.

The right approach

The Menstrual Hygiene Scheme under the National Health Mission aims at improving menstrual hygiene, especially in rural areas, by providing free or affordable sanitary pads. Despite its goals, these provisions are absent in the LRK region. Awareness programmes and safe pad disposal initiatives are conducted, with training for anganwadi workers. However, questions remain about the state’s commitment to these programmes, particularly in Agariya settlements.

The scheme aims at reducing unhealthy practices, improving health and eliminating menstruation stigma, yet environmentalist Mudita Vidrohi highlights concerns over its execution. “A multi-dimensional approach is essential. It should include information and education to address gender equality standards and the stigma surrounding menstruation,” she says.

“There must be an adequate number of safe and private toilets, easily accessible water facility for hygiene purposes, culturally appropriate menstrual products and materials [such as cloth, pads], socially and environmentally suitable methods for the disposal of used sanitary materials, private washing/drying facilities for clothes, practical information on maintaining hygiene during menstruation and supportive healthcare services,” Harinesh Pandya of Agariya Heet Rakshak Manch tells 101Reporters.

Ahmedabad-based writer Preeti Jain Agyat stresses the importance of linking anganwadi centres and midday meal workers to a system of providing sanitary napkins for women and girls.

“Regular supply of sanitary pads is essential. Corporate Social Responsibility can play a crucial role in eliminating these issues in Kutch. Activating panchayats and involving non-governmental organisations in this campaign could also make a significant impact” says Jog.

On dealing with water scarcity, Bharat Somera, a social activist based at Patdi in Surendranagar district, says, “During the British era, water was supplied through pipes over a limited distance of five to eight km in LRK. There is a need to revive and expand this pipeline. Additionally, the daily water supply needs to be ensured, and the amount of water per household should be increased.”

Asked if it is possible to effectively address the issues of water supply and women’s health in Kutch, Pandya retorts, “Why not? If the vibrant Rann Utsav flourishes in the desert, surely this challenge is within reach. What is required is the resolve of our leaders and bureaucracy.”

Amarendra Kishore is a freelance journalist and a member of 101Reporters, a pan-India network of grassroots reporters. 

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Gujarat: A Painful Period in Salt Pans of Little Rann of Kutch appeared first on SabrangIndia.

“This land is your land, and this land is my land

From California to the New York island

From the Redwood Forest to the Gulf Stream waters

This land was made for you and me”

A special stanza of the song was:

“There was a big, high wall there that tried to stop me

A sign was painted said ‘Private Property’

But on the backside, it didn’t say nothing

This land was made for you and me.”

The song is essentially a protest song, first composed by the American folk singer Woody Guthrie in 1940. It was a critical response to Irving Berlin’s ‘God Bless America’ Its melody is based on a Carter Family tune called ‘When the World’s on Fire’. The song was a hit then, particularly during World War II; over the years, the lyrics of the song have undergone several changes and adaptations. The essence however remains the same, “this land was made for you and me.” In 2025, it was listed at No. 11 of ‘The 100 Best Protest Songs of All Time.’ Given the context of the highly polarised and divided world we live in– this song is definitely all the more relevant today!

About a week ago, on Sunday 2 March, at the 97^th Academy Awards, ‘No Other Land’ won the coveted Oscar for the Best Documentary Film. The film has been made by four Israeli and Palestinian activists (Basel Adra, Hamdan Ballal, Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor) and is a powerful examination of life under occupation. It is their directorial debut. They describe the film as an act of resistance on the path to justice during the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.

‘No Other Land’ is a portrait of a West Bank village under Israeli military occupation. The documentary film gets its title from a statement by a long-time Masafer Yatta resident who says, “we have no other land. It is our land. That is why we suffer for it.” For the ones who have seen this path-breaking documentary. ‘No Other Land’ is a breathtakingly powerful chronicle of what it means to live with the constant threat of eviction. The film captures with heartrending detail the relentlessness of Israel’s effort to remove any trace of Palestinian presence in the West Bank. This reality is what the world painfully witnesses today and yet does not dare to address collectively!

The documentary has the friendship between Basel and Yuval as a backgrounder. Their relationship is filled with intense emotions. Basel is very anxious over the fate of his family and village, to the point of exhaustion. Yuval expresses guilt and sorrow over being unable to prevent imminent destruction or to persuade his fellow- Israelis to see reason. There is a sad but grim irony when Basel says that he has a law degree, but can only find work as a construction labourer in Israel. The manner in which the judiciary can be used to redesignate land use and thus enable unfeeling eviction policies points to a familiar playbook predicated on absolute denial of basic human rights.

In their acceptance speech, two of the film’s four directors pleaded for an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Basel Adra, a Palestinian activist who is from Masafer Yatta, a region of the West Bank said, “About two months ago, I became a father, and my hope to my daughter [is] that she will not have to live the same life I’m living now – always fearing settlers’ violence, home demolitions and forceful displacements that my community, Masafer Yatta, is living and facing every day under the Israeli occupation.…We call on the world to take serious actions to stop the injustice and to stop the ethnic cleansing of Palestinian people.” Adra also described the issues faced by his village, including home demolitions and displacement.

Yuval Abraham, an Israeli investigative journalist, co-director of the film said, “When I look at Basel, I see my brother, but we are unequal. We live in a regime where I am free under civilian law, and Basel is under military laws that destroy his life and he cannot control. Israelis and Palestinians are ‘intertwined’; my people can be truly safe if Basel’s people are truly free and safe.”

In February 2024, at the 74th Berlin International Film Festival, ‘No Other Land’ won the Berlinale Documentary Award and the Panorama Audience Award for Best Documentary Film. During his acceptance speech then, Abraham criticized Israel saying, “We are standing in front of you now, me and Basel are the same age. I am Israeli; Basel is Palestinian. And in two days we will go back to a land where we are not equal. I am living under a civilian law and Basel is under military law. We live 30 minutes from one another, but I have voting rights. Basel is not having voting rights. I’m free to move where I want in this land. Basel is, like millions of Palestinians, locked in the occupied West Bank. This situation of apartheid between us, this inequality, it has to end”.

Adra chipped in saying, “It’s our first movie; since many years my community, my family has been filming our community being erased by this brutal occupation. I am here celebrating the award, but also very hard for me to celebrate when there are tens of thousands of my people being slaughtered and massacred by Israel in Gaza. Masafer Yatta, my community, is being also razed by Israeli bulldozers. I ask one thing: for Germany, as I am in Berlin here, to respect the U.N. calls and stop sending weapons to Israel.”

Since its release in February 2024, the documentary has won numerous awards and accolades from all over the world. However, for obvious reasons it has not been screened in India. Even its entry to certain Film Festivals here, has been inexplicably cancelled. The fascist regime which rules the country today will not allow Freedom of Speech and Expression to its citizens. A film which shows the Israeli regime in poor light, is in India, a certain ‘no-no’! Even in the United States, the film has failed to find a distributor because it reveals truths that Americans should not see! When the film won the Oscar, it was natural that some Israelis were outraged, using every trick in the book to denigrate the directors of the film and the cast.

‘No Other Land’ is about divisiveness and discrimination, about demonization and denigration, about demolition and destruction! At the receiving end are the Palestinian people – the ‘other’! It is not without reason that Pope Francis has been praying every single day for them and regularly speaking to those affected in Gaza. It is a film which is a powerful manifestation of the terrible reality faced by millions all over the world. Here in India, the Kuki-zo people of Manipur and the minorities (particularly Muslims and Christians) have to face this reality daily!

As the bull-dozers, continue to go on rampage demolishing and destroying the lives and homes of the vulnerable, it is time that the fascist and dictatorial rulers of the world realise that “this land was made for you and me” and wake up to the statement by the Masafer Yatta resident “we have no other land. It is our land. That is why we suffer for it.”  Yes, there is No Other Land! 

(Fr. Cedric Prakash SJ is a human rights, reconciliation and peace activist/ writer. Contact: cedricprakash@gmail.com  )

The post No Other Land! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

This was the situation in several villages of Bali block in Pali district of Rajasthan inhabited by the Garasia tribal community about a decade back. Women were deeply troubled by the increasing drift towards alcoholism which was partly triggered by the proliferation of illegal selling joints in remote villages in addition to the extension of legally sanctioned liquor selling shops or thekas.

In contrast, however, one positive development had also emerged. In recent times an increasing number of self-help groups had been organized in many of these villages, particularly involving women of the Garasia tribal community. While the more obvious aim was to promote savings and economic security, at the meetings of these groups the women also discussed their other serious problems and concerns and whenever they discussed serious problems including violence against women and economic crisis situations, the growing alcoholism emerged as an important cause of these problems in these discussions.

Can we do something to check this ever-increasing problem, these women asked each other in their group discussions, and in the course of these deliberations, some kind of a plan began to emerge.

The women increasingly felt that only small village-level efforts will not be adequate, a bigger impact must be created by planning something that will reveal the depth of their feelings regarding the increasing menace.

After considering many suggestions the women decided that they will get together to organize a very long march covering most of the area over which their villages are located.

To symbolize their unity and their determination for a joint effort, they decided to prepare a pink dress that they would all be wearing in the course of this march. It was also decided that other social reform issues such as reducing child marriages and preventing domestic violence will also be raised during the march to impart a wider social reform dimension to this march, although the core issue will remain that of checking the increasing alcoholism.

This decision of women from weaker section households was very courageous as the legal and illegal sellers of liquor were known to be among the most powerful and violent persons of this region.

Starting early in morning this march of women covered a distance of nearly 25 km and ended at night. As many as about 2000 women participated in this long march.

On the way they smashed up several illegal liquor making bhattis (joints) and illegal selling units. They stopped in front of legal liquor vends and shouted slogans against opening liquor shops even in remote villages.

This march made a big impact on people. The courage of the women in confronting the powerful liquor lobby and mafia was widely appreciated. The increasing drift towards alcoholism could be checked. In addition, there was a reduction in domestic violence.

There was also a lot of follow-up- action in the form of sending representations to the authorities for shutting down illegal liquor selling joints and also making community level efforts for this. There was a continuing dialogue on the highly adverse impacts of increasing alcoholism on the community. All this helped to check the increasing spread of alcoholism.

After the peak of this activity had passed, these women and their groups continued their efforts to check the spread of alcoholism at a smaller level in later years. The result has been that the earlier trend of fast drift towards alcoholism could be checked on a more stable and permanent basis. A recent visit to these villages and conversations with women here revealed that the problem has reduced compared to the worst period seen before the women’s anti-liquor march was undertaken.

Meanwhile these women and their groups have also continued to be active in taking up a range of other important social issues. They continue to remember the march as a very inspirational part of their efforts, one indication of which is that group members have permanently adopted the pink colour dress prepared at the time of the march as their regular dress by which the group members are recognized even now.

The writer is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Protecting Earth for Children, A Day in 2071 and Man over Machine.   

The post Women in remote villages mobilise to check fast spread of alcoholism appeared first on SabrangIndia.