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.

The report identifies the reported disappearance and killing of journalist Mukesh Chandrakar in Bastar in early January as emblematic of the dangers faced by those who speak truth to power. Chandrakar had reported on poor-quality road construction in the region shortly before he went missing; his body was later found in a septic tank. The FSC notes that this incident set the tone for a year in which nine people were killed for exercising their right to free speech, including eight journalists and one social media influencer. It underscores that violence against journalists—particularly those working in rural and semi-urban districts—remains one of the most visible and brutal forms of silencing.

Journalists as primary targets

The FSC report records 40 attacks on free speech actors in 2025, of which 33 targeted journalists. It notes that reporters covering local corruption, illegal mining, liquor mafias, and administrative failures were especially vulnerable. In several cases, the police initially attempted to attribute killings or deaths to personal disputes, accidents, or intoxication, even when the journalists had recently published sensitive stories. The report highlights the case of Uttarakhand-based YouTuber Rajeev Pratap, whose body was recovered from the Bhagirathi, river days after he aired a video exposing liquor consumption inside a local hospital. Despite colleagues raising serious doubts, police claimed he had driven into the river while drunk.

The FSC further draws attention to the continued incarceration of journalists Irfan Mehraj and Rupesh Kumar under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, noting that their prolonged detention without trial exemplifies the use of counter-terror laws to suppress journalism. Threats and harassment accompanied physical violence: at least 14 of 19 harassment incidents and 12 of 17 recorded threats were directed at journalists engaged in professional work. The report cites, as illustrative, a threat by TDP MLA Gummanur Jayaram to force journalists “to sleep on railway tracks” if they published allegedly false information about him.

The return of sedition and criminal lawfare

One of the most troubling findings of the report is the resurgence of sedition prosecutions, despite repeated assurances that colonial-era speech offences had been rendered obsolete under the new criminal codes. The FSC documents multiple sedition cases filed in 2025 against satirists, journalists, and political commentators for online posts questioning state action.

The report details how satirists Neha Singh Rathore, Madri Kakoti (Dr Medusa), and Shamita Yadav (Ranting Gola) were charged with sedition for social media commentary following the Pahalgam attack. It flags the Allahabad High Court’s rejection of Rathore’s anticipatory bail as a significant departure from earlier judicial reluctance to allow sedition prosecutions for speech. The FSC also records the filing of sedition FIRs by Assam police against the leadership and columnists of The Wire, including founding editor Siddharth Varadarajan and consulting editor Karan Thapar, as well as against journalist Abhisar Sarma for a YouTube programme that relied on publicly available judicial observations.

According to the report, these cases exemplify “lawfare”—the strategic use of criminal law not necessarily to secure convictions, but to intimidate, exhaust, and silence critical voices through prolonged legal processes.

Mass censorship and platform control

The largest category of violations documented by the FSC in 2025 relates to censorship and internet control, with 11,385 instances recorded. The report highlights mass government takedown requests to social media platforms, particularly X (formerly Twitter). In May and July 2025 alone, over 10,000 accounts were withheld in India. Citing X’s submissions before the Karnataka High Court, the report notes that the platform received 29,118 takedown requests from the Indian government between January and June 2025 and complied with the overwhelming majority of them.

The FSC identifies the Sahyog portal as a key institutional mechanism enabling decentralised censorship by allowing state agencies, district officials, and local police to issue takedown notices directly to platforms. Following the Pahalgam attack, numerous accounts belonging to journalists, news organisations, and international media outlets—including The Wire, Maktoob Media, Reuters, and many senior journalists—were withheld without public disclosure of reasons. The report notes that the Karnataka High Court’s decision upholding the Sahyog portal effectively legitimised large-scale, opaque censorship of online speech.

The ‘Hidden Hand’: Self-censorship and corporate influence

Beyond formal orders, the FSC report devotes significant attention to what it terms the “hidden hand” of censorship: informal pressures, verbal directives, and institutional intimidation that rarely leave a documentary trail. The report cites instances of journalists receiving “friendly calls,” media houses quietly dropping stories, and investigative platforms being financially crippled through regulatory action, such as the revocation of The Reporter’s Collective’s tax-exempt status.

Corporate power, the report notes, increasingly intersected with state censorship. It documents the September 2025 ex-parte injunction obtained by Adani Enterprises leading to the takedown of over 200 pieces of online content critical of the company, as well as sustained attempts to suppress reporting on the Vantara wildlife project linked to Reliance Industries. Even where courts later set aside gag orders, the report observes that the chilling effect on media coverage persisted.

Academia, cinema, and the right to think

The FSC records at least 16 serious instances of censorship in academia, including the cancellation of conferences, denial of permissions, deportation of visiting scholars, and the revocation of OCI status of academics critical of the government. In Kashmir, the report notes, authorities banned 25 books on the region’s history and politics and raided bookstores.

In cinema, the report documents excessive cuts, prolonged certification delays, and outright denial of certification to films addressing caste violence, state abuse, or social injustice. It notes that even internationally acclaimed films and centenary classics were barred from screening, underscoring how certification had become a tool of prior restraint rather than classification.

An uneven judicial response

While acknowledging some notable judicial interventions in favour of free speech, the FSC concludes that the judiciary’s overall response in 2025 was inconsistent. The report contrasts strong Supreme Court observations protecting poetry, satire, and art with orders that imposed gag conditions, endorsed expansive censorship mechanisms, or demanded apologies from artists. This inconsistency, the report argues, has failed to provide a stable constitutional shield for free expression.

A shrinking democratic space

In its concluding assessment, the Free Speech Collective warns that the cumulative impact of violence, lawfare, mass censorship, corporate pressure, and regulatory overreach has fundamentally altered the conditions under which speech is exercised in India. The report cautions that free expression has not been extinguished outright, but increasingly conditioned, surveilled, and constrained, creating a climate in which self-censorship becomes a rational act of survival.

As the report starkly concludes, the “hidden hand” shaping India’s speech landscape in 2025 is no longer subtle—it has become structural.

The complete report may be read here.

Related:                                                            

The ‘Shastra Poojan’ Project: How the ritual of weapon worship is being recast as a tool of power and hate propaganda

MP, Odisha, Delhi, Rajasthan: Right-wing outfits barge into 2 churches ahead of Christmas, attack vendors selling X’mas goodies, tensions run high

No right to live, or die: Christians in Chhattisgarh, and India under attack

Kerala: Protests erupt after RSS-BJP man’s alleged attack on children’s Christmas carol group in Palakkad

‘Brutal intimidation of Christians’ all India condemned: Bombay Catholic Sabha

The post Free Speech in India 2025: What the Free Speech Collective report reveals about a year of silencing appeared first on SabrangIndia.

We bring you the exclusive transcript of the latest episode of “Cross Bat,” the high-octane, metaphor heavy talk show hosted by the ever ebullient Balancedeep Sabchangasi. Known for his penchant for framing national crises through the nostalgic lens of 1970s Bollywood melodies and the technical nuances of a late-cut at Eden Gardens, Balancedeep attempts to find “balance” even when the pitch is clearly crumbling.

His guest is none other than Cyrus Behramji Puranafurniturewala, a man who exemplifies the delightful charm of a bygone era. A veteran carpenter and restorer of vintage teak and rosewood, Cyrus operates from the old money enclave of Colaba. However, he is perhaps better known for his missives to the highest echelons of power, penned with the elegant precision of an antique dealer and the sharp wit of a seasoned observer. Cyrus represents the Model Citizen of the Amrit Kaal. He is a man who claims to be most law-abiding citizen, while using a strategic “naïve” voice to dissect the shenanigans of our times.

In this exchange, the duo tackles the controversial new MGNREGA Bill. The proposed legislation seeks to fundamentally transform rural employment by repealing the historic 2005 Act and replacing the legal right to work with a supply-driven, centrally capped model. This new framework shifts a significant 40% of the material funding burden to state governments and introduces mandatory 60 day work pauses during agricultural seasons, potentially curtailing the scheme’s responsiveness to local distress. Perhaps most symbolically, the bill removes the “Mahatma Gandhi” prefix from the program’s title, signalling a substantive ideological shift in India’s social safety net.

Cyrus, in his signature style, defends the government’s overhaul of the rural employment guarantee^, discussing key aspects such as democratic checks and socioeconomic security. ^.

The Transcript: Cross Bat with Balancedeep Sabchangasi

Balancedeep Sabchangasi: Welcome to Cross Bat! Today, we’re looking at the new MGNREGA Bill. Is it a masterstroke, a ‘Helicopter Shot’ over the boundary, or are we witnessing a hit wicket for rural India? To help us navigate this, we have the legendary restorer of both furniture and public discourse, Cyrus Behramji Puranafurniturewala. Cyrus, the government says extreme poverty has fallen faster than a wicket on a green top pitch. Yet, they’ve extended free food grains to 800 million people under PMGKAY until 2028. Is this a classic Bollywood double role, or a contradiction that even Kishore Kumar couldn’t harmonize?

Cyrus Behramji Puranafurniturewala: Balancedeep, may I call you BS? You approach the subject with the frantic energy of a bowler in the final over. Please, decelerate. In the hallowed halls of governance, this is not a contradiction. This is Strategic Surplus. You see, the world should see that the house is sturdy to maintain the shining veneer. Yet we keep the pantry stocked with 800 million bags of grain just in case the floorboards collapse^. It is a “pre-emptive philanthropy” that ensures the masses are sufficiently fed so they do not have the ungrateful urge to demand their “legal right” to work. We are polishing the image of prosperity while acknowledging, in a hushed whisper, that the wood may be a wee bit termite-ridden.  

BS: But Cyrus, let’s talk about the “repair” job. Social audits show that, post Digital reforms, misappropriation of funds is less than 0.3%. That’s a cleaner record than most mid table teams! Why do a complete structural overhaul and repeal the legal right to work when a bit of digital “varnishing” would have sufficed?

Cyrus: My dear boy, a legal right is a very cumbersome piece of furniture. It is like a heavy Victorian wardrobe that refuses to fit into a modern, streamlined apartment. It is unwieldy. By repealing the right and shifting to a centrally capped model, the government is merely practicing administrative minimalism. We are de-sanctifying the labour of the commoner. Why should the state be legally bound to provide work when it can simply offer normative allocations based on the prevailing mood in the capital? It’s about flexibility! Should the timber refuse to align with the Amrit Kaal décor, the state can simply withhold the varnish of central allocation.

BS: Flexibility? Studies show no widespread farm labour shortages, yet the bill introduces mandatory 60 day pauses during harvest seasons. Isn’t this like telling a batsman he can’t score during the Powerplay? You’re depriving workers of income exactly when they’re most vulnerable.

Cyrus: It is a rhythmic intermission. We must ensure the rural folk do not become addicted to the stability of a government wage. It spoils the entrepreneurial spirit of the impoverished! By forcing a pause, we encourage them to explore the “free market” of private exploitation, err, I mean, private enterprise. It is a lesson in character building. If they cannot find work in the fields, they can always practice coloured spit accuracy while chewing paan or while their time near garbage piles, which, as I have hitherto suggested, are the new benchmarks for a simplified citizenship.

BS: Let’s talk about the funding. The 60:40 split is a heavy bouncer for states like Punjab or Tamil Nadu. If a state is fiscally strained and can’t meet its 40% share, the workers suffer. Did the government model this risk, or is this “trickle-up” economics where the states are left to fend for themselves?

Cyrus: It is Fiscal Darwinism, BS. We are fostering a healthy competition in destitution. If a state cannot afford its share of the material costs, it simply proves that its administration lacks the visionary zeal of the centre. The Union Budget remains stagnant at ₹86,000 crore, while dues exceed ₹21,000 crore. This is a masterclass in aspirational accounting. We promise the glory of Amrit Kaal while ensuring the material reality is as thin as a cheap plywood veneer. It’s about the feeling of employment, not the actual payment.

BS: But what about the consultation, Cyrus? The original bill was debated for a year with unions and civil society. This one was passed in a midnight session amidst a walkout, debated for barely a few hours. Is this thorough scrutiny or a quick single taken while the wicketkeeper wasn’t looking?

Cyrus: Consultation is such a “pre-digital” concept. Why consult the NREGA Sangharsh Morcha or Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan when their views might cause a cognitive dissonance with the government’s perfect plan? Consulting a worker about a labour bill is like asking the rosewood if it wants to be chiselled. The wood has no macro-perspective. The carpenter knows best! Passing it after midnight is a stroke of nocturnal genius. It ensures that only the most law-abiding and awake citizens are present to witness the unanimous voice vote.

BS: Cyrus, opposition members have suggested looking at Brazil’s Bolsa Família, Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Net, or similar schemes in Mexico and South Africa to mitigate concerns. Could we not have learned from these global best practices to build a more robust, less controversial bill?

Cyrus: Brazil? Ethiopia? My dear BS, those are foreign timbers. We are building an Atmanirbhar cabinet here. Why look at a South African model that might favour equity or transparency when we can have a uniquely Indian model of opaque benevolence? To learn from others is to admit that our unparalleled wisdom has a limit. We don’t need best practices from abroad. We have kick-ass creativity at home! Besides, international schemes often involve accountability, which is a very difficult stain to remove once it sets into the wood.

BS: Speaking of accountability, there were no time-bound, measurable goals added. No specific targets for poverty reduction or narrowing the inequality gap. Isn’t a bill without a deadline just a dead rubber match?

Cyrus: A time-bound goal is a trap for the unwary! If you set a goal, people expect you to reach it. That is very un-Sanskari! By keeping the goals vague and the rhetoric high, we maintain a permanent state of “becoming.” We are always about to reduce inequality. We are always on the verge of ending poverty. It keeps the privileged class, of which I am a senior member, in a state of comfortable anticipation while the “trickle-up” continues to the penthouse. Why have a poverty reduction target when you can have a glory expansion target? It also makes the Supreme Leader’s role easier.

BS: Finally, the name. Mahatma Gandhi’s name has been dropped. No discussion. Just a “symbolic” exit. Is this a substantive reform or an ideological renovation?

Cyrus: The Mahatma, with his spinning wheel and his truth, was a bit too austere for the high-gloss finish of the modern era. We needed something that reflects the supply-driven reality of our times. In fact, I have drafted a proposal for a new, more fitting acronym for the scheme: S.C.R.A.P.

BS: SCRAP?

Cyrus: Indeed! The “Strategic Centrally Restricted Allocation Program.” It is honest. It is efficient. And it tells the rural poor exactly what the government thinks of their legal rights, that they are bits of old wood to be scrapped and replaced with the shiny, hollow plastic of modern governance.

BS: Cyrus, as always, you’ve left us with much to polish in our minds. Whether this bill is a century or a duck remains to be seen, but the craftsmanship is certainly unique.

Cyrus: Just remember, BS, that in the Amrit Kaal, if you can’t fix the rot, you simply apply a thicker coat of varnish and call it an “antique”!

Balancedeep Sabchangasi: As we wrap up this intense session of Cross Bat, I find myself feeling like a batsman who’s survived a fiery spell from a vintage pacer like Malcolm Marshall. I feel bruised, bewildered, but certainly enlightened. What have we learned today from the inimitable Cyrus Behramji Puranafurniturewala? Is this the Amrit Kaal renovation of our rural safety net? Is it a complete structural overhaul that replaces legal rights with central discretion?  Is just the surface being polished to a high gloss finish? Is the underlying grain of security for the most vulnerable being shimmied down to nothing^? Is the 60:40 funding split a Fiscal Darwinism? How does one view the nocturnal efficiency of a midnight voice vote? Is the craftsmanship of this bill a sophisticated exercise in rhetorical engineering?

As the haunting notes of “Zindagi Kaisi Hai Paheli” echo in the background, I ask you, our audience: Is this new S.C.R.A.P. model a visionary leap toward efficiency, or are we simply applying a thick coat of varnish over a deepening crisis? Is accountability such difficult stain to remove? We want to hear your views. Please send us your feedback via our digital channels.

Don’t forget to support Cross Bat. Like a classic Kishore-da melody, we strive to hit the right notes, even when the lyrics are difficult. Stay balanced, stay questioning, and we’ll see you at the next delivery.

 (A regular contributor to SabrangIndia, the writer is a conscientious citizen and a man of science and letters)

Related:

The Cross Bat Conversation: Air, antiques and force majeure

The Nation needs an Ethanol Republic – A Satire

A Satirical Imperative Request (SIR) to the CEC of India

Cyrus Seeks a Right to Multiple Voter Ids

A Satirical Plea, Dripping with Envy, to President Xi Jinping of China

The post Out with MNREGA: Hitting the Poor for a Six appeared first on SabrangIndia.

This questionable decision was made during a meeting of the Chaudhary community held last Sunday in Gazipur village, Jalore district, chaired by Sujnaram Chaudhary, the president of the 14 pattis (subdivisions). The meeting was chaired by community president Sujanaram Chaudhary, with elders deliberating on mobile phone usage within families. The resolution was formally read out by Panch Himmataram and proposed by Devaram Karnol, community members said. The controversial “ban”, it is reported, will be enforced in villages including Gajipura, Pavli, Kalra, Manojia Vas, Rajikawas, Datlawas, Rajpura, Kodi, Sidrodi, Alri, Ropsi, Khanadeval, Savidhar, Hathmi ki Dhani of Bhinmal, and Khanpur, all of which fall within the Patti region of Jalore district.

It was while speaking to PTI, that Chaudhary said that Panch Himmtaram announced the decision. According to Himmtaram, after discussions among panch members and community members, it was decided that daughters-in-law and young women would exclusively use keypad phones for calling.

Besides this, school-going girls who need mobile phones for their studies may use them only at home. They are not allowed to take mobile phones to weddings, social events, or even to a neighbour’s house, Chaudhary further explained, Chaudhary mentioned further. No restrictions have been reportedly placed on boys going to school, however!

When he was questioned on the opposition regarding the panchayat’s decision, Chaudhary clarified that this measure was taken because children often use the mobile phones of women in their households, which may negatively affect their eyesight. He noted that some women give their phones to children to keep them distracted, allowing them to focus on their daily chores.

The New Indian Express reported how Jalore has witnessed similar controversial community diktats in the past. Last year, 2024, local elders ordered the social boycott of two families after a young couple entered into a love marriage, imposing a fine of ₹12 lakh for their re-entry into the community. The couple later approached the Bhinmal police, following which police intervened and facilitated a compromise with most elders, though a few continued to justify the boycott.

June 2025, Caste panchayat enforces social boycott of 55 families in Jalore

In another similar incident in June, a caste panchayat in Jalore announced a social boycott of 55 families over a long-standing dispute related to temple land between two factions of the same extended family. The diktat barred community members from attending weddings, social functions, and even funerals of the affected families. The panchayat also warned that anyone who raised objections would face excommunication and monetary penalties. A complaint in connection with the matter was subsequently lodged at the Bagra police station.

Related:

Telangana High Court affirms right of Akbhari Shia Women to conduct religious activities in Hyderabad’s Ibadat Khana

A right half won, evolution of women’s right to property under the Hindu Succession Act

Women, married or unmarried have the right to safe & legal abortion: SC

The post Rajasthan panchayat in Jalore district bans camera phones for daughters-in-law appeared first on SabrangIndia.