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.

The post Love Letters like no other. Letters from Savitribai to Jyotiba appeared first on SabrangIndia.

This debate was, at its core, a philosophical exercise, not a theological trial. Even if we accept Mufti Nadvi’s logical arguments for a Creator, they do not automatically validate the specific beliefs of his religion. To confuse a philosophical “First Cause” with a religious “Personal God” is a leap of faith, not logic. Here is a breakdown of why this debate cannot be claimed as a victory for organized religion, based on a scientific and critical review of the proceedings.

1. The “First Cause” is Not a Religious Victory

The central pillar of the Mufti Nadvi’s argument was the “Argument from Contingency” (or the Cosmological Argument)—that the universe is contingent and thus requires a “Necessary Being” or a First Cause to exist. While this is a powerful philosophical concept, utilizing it to prove a specific religion is a bait-and-switch tactic.

• The Trap of the “First Cause”:Proving that a “Necessary Being” exists only leads us to Deism—the belief in a creator who set the universe in motion. It does not lead us to Theism—the belief in a God who sends books, prophets, and laws.
• Javed Akhtar’s Real Contention:As noted in the debate, Akhtar’s primary objection is not necessarily against a distant, abstract “First Cause” (which he dismisses as irrelevant). His intellectual battle is with the character of God as portrayed by religions—a God who demands worship, intervenes in human affairs, and allows massive suffering.
• The Metaphysical Reality:Both debaters agreed that God is not a physical entity. If the “Necessary Being” is a metaphysical reality not subject to physical proof, then it is equally not subject to religious anthropomorphism.

2. The Flaw of Imposed Rules

A significant procedural flaw in the debate was the framing of the rules.

• Unilateral Rule Setting:At the outset, the mufti set the parameters: no scriptural evidence, only logic. In a fair debate, one participant cannot unilaterally impose the epistemology. By restricting the debate to “logic only,” the Mufti Nadvi attempted to shield religion from the scrutiny of history and

morality, arenas where religious dogmas often falter.

• Breaking His Own Precedent:The most critical breakdown occurred when Javed Akhtar raised the logical problem of evil and suffering (e.g., children dying in Gaza).

The mufti, unable to answer this strictly through the “logic” he demanded, retreated into religious apologetics. He invoked concepts of “divine wisdom,” “tests,” and “afterlife justice”—all of which are religious beliefs, not logical proofs. This violated his own rule that religious arguments were inadmissible.

3. The Problem of Evil: Logic vs. Apologetics

The clash over the existence of evil was the debate’s turning point, and it highlights why the “religion won” narrative is flawed.

• Logic, Not Just Poetry:Critics often dismiss Javed Akhtar’s arguments as emotional poetry. However, the Problem of Evil is a rigid logical argument. If God is All-Powerful and All-Good, evil cannot exist. Since evil exists, God is either not All-Powerful or not All-Good. This carries as much logical weight as Mufti Nadvi’s “First Cause” argument.
• The Logical Fallacy of “The Test”:The mufti attempted to argue that God and Evil coexist simultaneously, and while God created Evil, He is not responsible for it (attributing it to free will or tests). This is a logical fallacy. If a “Necessary Being” is the source of all reality, it cannot absolve itself of the reality it created.
• The Atheist’s Conclusion:For Javed Akhtar, the existence of suffering is not just a complaint; it is positive evidence that a benevolent, intervening God does not exist.

4. The False Binary of Theist vs. Atheist

The debate also suffered from the rigid binary through which both sides view the world.

• Religious Blindness:Religious apologists tend to view every non-religious individual as a hard core atheist. They fail to recognize deists, agnostics, or spiritual seekers who reject organised religion but accept a higher power.
• Atheistic Blindness:Conversely, atheists often group all believers into the category of “religious fundamentalists,” ignoring those who view God philosophically rather than dogmatically.

The real issue facing humanity is not the abstract existence of a deity, but the concrete existence

of suffering. While the Mufti Nadvi offers religious belief as the solution and Javed Akhtar offers secular values and collective human effort, the debate highlights that since suffering is a universal human experience, it demands a universal, secular framework for integration rather than a solution limited to the boundaries of a single faith.

5. The Irony of “Western” Arguments

Perhaps the greatest irony of the debate lies in the tools used by Mufti Nadvi.

• Imported Philosophy:The “Argument from Contingency” and the “Cosmological Argument” are deeply rooted in Western philosophy (Aristotle, Plato) and later adapted by Muslim philosophers (like Avicenna).
• Theological Contradiction:Historically, orthodox religious authorities often opposed these philosophical methods, tagging supporters of logic, science, and philosophy as heretics orkafirs. It is paradoxical that modern religious apologists now rely on the very same “Western philosophical arguments” their predecessors despised to defend their faith.

6. From Indoctrination to Education

Ultimately, the discussion shouldn’t be about which specific religious God supposedly

revealed, but rather acknowledging that the greatest divine gift is the human capacity for reason. If we rely on this reasoning rather than the ‘ready-made’ arguments of religious doctrine, we can identify the actual, tangible causes of human suffering. The way forward requires a shift from indoctrination to education—moving humanity from the comfort of unquestionable beliefs to the scrutiny of accountable facts.

7. The Paradox of “Universal” Religion

While many might accept the spiritual concept of ultimate accountability before God, the problem arises when religion oversteps this boundary. Organized religion rarely stops at spiritual accountability; it intervenes in logic, scientific development, and politics. Furthermore, there is a fundamental contradiction in its claim of ‘universal acceptability.’ In reality, every religion is bound by its own regional characteristics—specific nomenclature, dressing styles, ‘godly’ languages, and cultural practices. A system that is so deeply rooted in a specific regional culture cannot truly claim to be universal without imposing that culture on others.”

Conclusion

The debate was a collision of two different worlds: the philosophical search for a First Cause and the humanistic demand for justice. While Mufti Nadvi may have presented a coherent argument for a Deistic Creator, he failed to bridge the gap to a Theistic God who cares about human worship.

Javed Akhtar’s critique remains unanswered: We do not need to prove the existence of a Creator as much as we need to question the silence of that Creator in the face of human suffering. Until religion can solve the problem of evil without resorting to circular belief, it cannot claim victory over reason.

The post Beyond Victory and Defeat: Why the ‘Does God Exist’ Debate Was Not a Win for Religion appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On October 28, the Modi-led BJP government attempted, much like Lord Curzon during colonial rule, to muzzle the democratic and federal character of Panjab University by dissolving its Senate. Under the Panjab University Act of 1947, the Senate is the highest democratic body of the university, responsible for its management, property, and governance. It consists of 91 members—47 elected, 36 nominated by the Chancellor, 2 from the Punjab Vidhan Sabha, and 6 ex-officio members. Punjab has direct representation through 15 graduate seats, with graduates eligible both to vote and contest elections. The Senate functions as the “parliament” of the university, while the Syndicate, its executive body, is elected from among Senate members.

Ironically, in 1904, Lord Curzon had introduced amendments to the Punjab University Act precisely to curb anti-colonial sentiment by weakening the Senate and increasing imperial control. Today, the Modi government appears to be following a similar path—seeking to abolish the Senate to undermine Punjab’s historical claim over Panjab University, erode its autonomy, centralise control, and pave the way for privatisation. However, the historic and organic movement led by students and supported by broader democratic forces shattered the BJP–RSS dream of turning Chandigarh into a “small Nagpur”.

The dissolution of the Senate sent a clear message: Panjab University was being taken away from Punjab, its democracy murdered, and its autonomy destroyed. This sparked widespread outrage across Punjab. Even opportunist electoral parties—many of which had previously betrayed people’s struggles—were compelled to join the protest. Conscious sections of Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, and other regions also recognised this as an attack on autonomy and democratic institutions and extended their support.

The Panjab University struggle has once again highlighted the urgency of addressing unresolved questions of federalism—particularly Punjab’s claim over Panjab University and Chandigarh, issues of river water sharing, other federal rights, and the systematic daylight assassination of democracy.

At its core, neoliberal policy directly undermines federalism by centralising power to facilitate large-scale privatisation. International institutions such as the IMF, World Bank, and WTO actively promote this centralisation to enable the exploitation of resources and labour. Thus, the erosion of federalism and democracy is not accidental but structural to the neoliberal project.

Indian rulers have historically preferred a highly centralised state rather than a genuinely federal one. During the anti-colonial struggle, the Indian National Congress promised linguistic federalism. However, after Independence, the Nehru–Patel–Sitaramayya (JVP) Committee rejected the Dhar Commission’s recommendations, arguing that state formation on linguistic lines would threaten “national unity”. In reality, greater state autonomy was seen as an obstacle to imperialist exploitation. Hence, a “strong Centre” was prioritised over true federalism.

Although popular struggles eventually forced the government to create linguistic states, this process lacked a sincere federal spirit. Punjab faced particularly harsh discrimination. After a prolonged struggle, the Punjab Reorganisation Act of 1966 created a truncated Punjab, carving away Punjabi-speaking areas, undermining Punjab’s river-water rights, and snatching Chandigarh—constructed by demolishing more than 28 Punjabi Puadhi villages. The three-language formula was imposed, and the religious and cultural demands of Sikh minorities were ignored.

Sections 72, 78, 79, 81, 84, and 87 of the same Act placed Panjab University, Punjab Agricultural University, the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, the Bhakra Beas Management Board, and Chandigarh under central control. Despite widespread protests, betrayal continued. Although the Rajiv–Longowal Accord promised Chandigarh to Punjab in 1986, the Centre reneged. Central control over the BBMB, the increased presence of the BSF, and the appointment of a centrally controlled administrator in Chandigarh continue to erode Punjab’s federal rights.

The assault on federalism intensified with the 42nd Constitutional Amendment in 1976, which transferred key subjects like education, forests, and minerals from the State List to the Concurrent List. The neoliberal reforms of the 1990s further weakened states’ political and financial autonomy. With GST, states have been reduced to little more than municipalities, facing centralised revenue collection, decentralised expenditure responsibilities, and constant administrative interference.

Under the BJP–Sangh’s Hindi–Hindu–Hindutva project—embodied in slogans like “one nation, one language,” “one nation, one tax,” “one nation, one election,” and “one nation, one education policy”—the fascist bulldozer has moved from vote theft to Senate theft. When the Centre attempted to snatch Panjab University, the people rose up and forced Modi to retreat once again.

The struggle also firmly rejected attempts to pit Punjab against Haryana. Protesters consistently emphasised that the Centre deliberately foments inter-state conflicts to push privatisation and allow corporate plunder of natural resources across Ladakh, Himachal, Kashmir, Manipur, and central India. This is not the time for people to fight among themselves; the real struggle is against a centralised state serving imperialist interests.

The dissolution of the Senate was carried out under the NEP 2020, which explicitly eliminates elected Senates, student unions, and teacher unions, replacing them with nominated bodies. Universities are being forced to raise fees, rely on loans instead of grants, generate profits, and submit to centrally imposed curricula and regulations. This is the BJP’s idea of “federalism”.

While the Centre strangles federalism, state governments and political parties have largely failed to resist. The Bhagwant Mann-led Punjab government neither provides adequate funding to Panjab University nor actively participates in Senate meetings. Universities across Punjab face acute financial crises, student and Senate elections are avoided, and the NEP 2020 is implemented without resistance.

Ultimately, no mainstream political party appears genuinely committed to federalism. History shows that the struggle for true federalism cannot be led to its logical conclusion by opportunist electoral forces. It must be led by the people themselves—by workers and peasants—through the uprooting of parasitic neoliberal imperialist policies.

Today, as centralisation and privatisation obstruct the development of emerging nationalities from Kashmir to the North-East and push Centre–State relations to a dead end, there is an urgent need for a united national struggle of working people for true federalism. Such federalism is impossible without complete democratisation of society, including the uprooting of feudalism and imperialism. The historic struggle at Panjab University can become a powerful starting point.

Sandeep Kumar PhD, Panjab University, Chandigarh, Member, Panjab University Bachao Morcha

Courtesy: Counter Currents

The post Historic Victory at Panjab University, but Federalism Remains at Stake 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.

The recent assault on the Editor of New Age and Editors’ Council President Nurul Kabir, and the mob attacks on the offices of the widely circulated Bangla daily Prothom Alo, and leading English-language publication Daily Star, in particular, mark a serious and deadly escalation in the ongoing cycle of violence against and intimidation of the media in Bangladesh.

The Guild has also noted with the gravest concern reports of death threats on social media against media persons, and has called on the Muhammad Yunus-led interim government in Bangladesh to immediately ensure the physical safety and well-being of journalists, and for quick action against the perpetrators of such violence.

These attacks constitute a clear violation of media freedom in South Asia and are an attempt to silence independent media voices and constrain civic discourse. The Guild calls on the authorities in Bangladesh and elsewhere to ensure that immediate action is taken to ensure that the media is allowed to function in an atmosphere free of threats, intimidations and violence.

The statement has been issued by the Guild president, Sanjay Kapoor, general secretary Raghavan Srinivasan and general secretary, Teresa Rehman.

Related:

Chaos in Bangladesh provides opportunity to right-wing social media to spread misinformation regarding Hindus, temples being attacked in the country

Kerala: BJP activists attack MediaOne TV headquarters during victory celebrations

One more attack on the Media: Local journalist thrashed and urinated upon by railway police, UP

The post Bangladesh: Assault and mob attack on journalists condemned by EGI appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Academy chairman Resul Pookutty confirmed that the films will be screened as per schedule. “We are going ahead with all the film screenings as scheduled. We will fight this out. We want the IFFK and its spirit to be saved,” Pookutty told Onmanorama.

For the first time in the history of the prestigious film festival, the Central government had insisted on MEA sanction to screen a select bunch of films at IFFK. The pending censorship exemption for 19 films has prompted cancellations and schedule revisions, sparking protests.

On Tuesday, December 16, four films were given exemption, but clearance for 15 films was put on hold. Academy officials said the films for which clearance is being withheld include old classics, restored versions, Palestinian movies, Sri Lankan films, and previous winners at the IFFK.

In the first instance, on December 16, Marian Alexander Baby, the general secretary of the state’s ruling Communist Party of India (Marxist) told the media that The Union Information and Broadcasting Ministry has denied the 2025 International Film Festival of Kerala permission to screen 19 films. The list includes films about Palestine. The event in Thiruvananthapuram began on December 12 and will conclude on December 19.

According to rules it is reported that, films without a censorship certificate require an exemption from I&B to be screened at film festivals. The procedure outlined is that festival organisers submit applications with a synopsis and get an exemption certificate. IFFK organisers said they submitted applications with film summaries 10 days prior to the start of the festival. Pookutty had earlier told Onmanorama that he had reached out to Minister for External Affairs S Jaishankar to find a solution.

Four films given exemption after an initial ban:  Beef, Eagles of Republic, Heart of the Wolf, once upon a time in Gaza. Palestine 36, an Arabic and English language movie, was the inaugural film of the event. On December 12, at the inauguration ceremony, Kerala’s Cultural Affairs Minister Saji Cherian had spoken about the state’s support for the Palestinian cause. Palestinian Ambassador to India Abdallah M Abu Shawesh was a guest at the event.

At the inauguration of the festival on December 12, while paying tribute to director Shaji N Karun, who was associated with the festival until his death in April 2025, Cherian also said that the festival was a platform that “resists fascism and autocracy while celebrating freedom of speech and creative expression”. Reported Scroll.in.

Films to be screened without censorship exemption

1. A Poet: Unconcealed Poetry
2. All That’s Left of You
3. Bamako
4. Battleship Potemkin
5. Clash
6. Palestine 36
7. Red Rain
8. Riverstone
9. The Hour of The Furnaces
10. Tunnels: Sun In the Dark (Địa Đạo: Mặt Trời Trong Bóng Tối)
11. Yes
12. Flames
13. Timbuktu
14. Wajib
15. Santosh

Background

Among the other films that were denied permission are A Poet: Unconcealed Poetry, Bamako, director Sergei Eisenstein’s 1925 classic Battleship Potemkin, Spanish film Beef, Clash, Eagles of The Republic, Heart of The Wolf, Red Rain, Riverstone, The Hour of The Furnaces, Tunnels: Sun In The Dark (Địa Đạo: Mặt Trời Trong Bóng Tối), Flames, Timbuktu, Wajib and Santosh.

Battleship Potemkin and director Abderrahmane Sissako’s 2006 docudrama Bamako have been widely shown at film festivals in India. Sissako was honoured by the IFFK with a Lifetime Achievement Award this year. MA Baby, General Secretary of the ruling CPI-M said that the film Beef had been denied permission “ostensibly because of its name, even though it has nothing to do with food choices”. The former minister said that the permissions being denied to screen the films was an “absurd and lunatic attempt to derail IFFK” and the “latest example of the neo-fascist tendencies of the extreme authoritarian rule” under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Union Home Minister Amit Shah and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh chief Mohan Bhagwat.The RSS is the parent organisation of the BJP. “Artists, filmmakers and all democratic-minded citizens must raise their voices against this disgraceful move,” he said.

The Democratic Youth Federation of India, the youth organisation affiliated to the CPI(M), held a protest at one of the main venues of the film festival.

Meanwhile Veteran filmmaker and Dadasaheb Phalke awardee, Adoor Gopalakrishnan, commenting on the attempted censorship of 19 films at the IFFK, including Battleship Potemkin, Beef and some Palestinian film was scathing in his comment, “This shows the ignorance of those making these decisions. Battleship Potemkin is an important study on the grammar of cinema.

VIDEO | Kerala: Veteran filmmaker and Dadasaheb Phalke awardee Adoor Gopalakrishnan, commenting on the hold on the screening of 19 films at IFFK, including Battleship Potemkin, Beef, and some Palestinian films, says, “It shows the ignorance of those making these decisions.… pic.twitter.com/TOCQCiElS9

— Press Trust of India (@PTI_News) December 15, 2025

Kerala Minister for Cultural Affairs Saji Cherian has directed State Chalachitra Academy to screen all the films at IFFK @iffklive, including the remaining 15 films for which the Union I&B ministry has not yet provided censor exemption.

Kerala Minister for Cultural Affairs Saji Cherian has directed State Chalachitra Academy to screen all the films at IFFK @iffklive , including the remaining 15 films for which the Union I&B ministry has not yet provided censor exemption.

— S.R.Praveen (@myopiclenses) December 16, 2025

Kerala refuses to bow down before the whimsical rulings of Central Board of FilmCertification that denied exemption for 19 films including classic film of Battleship Potemkin in a bid to disrupt the film festival. CM declares that all the19 films will be screened at IFFK .#IFFK

— Thomas Isaac (@drthomasisaac) December 16, 2025

Related:

TWO WAY STREET gets selected at the Pune Short Film Festival

First ever Dalit Film Festival to be held in New York in February

Terrorism at the Taj: ‘Hotel Mumbai’ pulls no punches at film festival

The post Kerala’s LDF govt to defy Centre’s diktat, to screen all films as per schedule at IFFK appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On Friday December 12, 2025, the Union Cabinet cleared HECI Bill under changed name the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhikshan (VBSA) Bill 2025. The Bill has been tabled in the Winter Session. The press conference of over two dozen organisations including the All India Forum for the Right to Education (AIFRTE) has demanded that the Bill, which will redefine Government’s commitment towards public funded higher education and therefore, its purpose, is referred to the Standing Committee for wider consultation.

Reminding the public that the VBSA Bill 2025 is a revived version of a similar HECI Bill 2018, a draft of which was released in June 2018. The revision is largely around renaming the Commission and Councils under it. The Draft HECI Bill 2018 had received more than a lakh unfavourable responses from concerned citizens, students’ and teachers’ associations, parliamentarians and other stakeholders. The public opposition to the Bill was so strong and vocal that the then-NDA government was forced to shelve it, and let it fade from public memory in these seven years before bringing it back.  The draft VBSA Bill 2025 was released on the portal of Members of Parliament on 14.12.2025. The feedback from the stakeholders on the draft HECI Bill 2018 seems to have been ignored completely. Pointing out that the VBSA Bill 2025 will simultaneously repeal the University Grants Commission (UGC) Act 1956, All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) Act, 1987 and National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) Act, 1993. The draft VBSA Bill 2025 was released on the portal of Members of Parliament on 14.12.2025. The feedback from the stakeholders on the draft HECI Bill 2018 seems to have been ignored completely.

Some of the most pressing concerns about the VBSA Bill 2025 are:

1. Delinking of funding and regulation: No Council under the Commission has been set for funding of HEIs. The VBSA Bill is to make the Ministry of Education (MoE) responsible for disbursing grants. This will make the process of grant allocation more bureaucratic, arbitrary, and subject to political considerations. By delinking the function of policy-making from the allocation of financial resources, the proposed Bill will use ‘public funding’ as a reward or punishment for ideological It will also heighten hierarchies between different tiers of institutions (Central and state, general and professional, scientific and technical, research and vocational, metropolitan and rural).

2. Composition of members: The composition of the VBSA Bill 2025 signals a takeover of higher education by the officials of the Central government. 10 out of the 12 members of the Commission are either direct recruits of or nominated “experts” by the Central government. Teachers are reduced to just two in number, which is absolutely unacceptable in a body that is to determine the standards and quality of higher education in the country. Both teacher representatives from state higher education institutions will, by virtue of being ‘nominees’ of the Central government, will also likely be political appointments. The composition of the commission does not also reflect the diversity of the country and gives no representation to marginalised groups like SCs, STs, OBCs, women, transpersons, persons with disabilities, and minorities.

3. Centralised regulatory regime: The regulatory provisions of the Bill — grant of authorisation, graded autonomy, and ordering closure of institutions — will install a heavily centralised regime that will lead to punitive annual audit, wastage of time and resources, greater job insecurity for teachers, massive fee hikes, and This will cause students and their family’s great unrest and anxiety. Finally, the fact that the VBSA Bill will have overriding effect over all previous legislation has serious consequences for the nation’s federal character.

4. Complete disregard for diversity: With regards to the setting of standards for higher education, a ‘one size fits all’ model can never succeed. The diversity of this country, and the fact that higher education is still expanding to various sections and particularly rural sectors of society, demands a regulator that is socially responsive and geared towards social justice. The HECI Bill instead aims at downsizing higher education, and completely ignores questions of equity and access. It threatens the closure of ‘underperforming’ public-funded institutions, which are anyway reeling under decades of policy neglect through lack of infrastructure, faculty and other physical-intellectual

5. Threat to autonomy of institutions and principle of federalism: The VBSA Bill puts an end to the autonomy of institutions of higher education from government control. Every regulation relating to standards made by the Commission has to have the prior approval of the Central government. This not only violates the constitutional character of education as part of the Concurrent list, but also leaves the vast majority of the country’s higher educational landscape – run and aided by state governments – in a political tussle with the ruling party at the Centre. It will also encourage the use of regulations as a means to stifle freedom of speech, thought, and dissenting opinion in higher educational institutions. An atmosphere of forced obedience does not encourage meaningful improvements in society or in the state of knowledge.

6. Heightening the crises caused by NEP 2020: It is being argued that the setting up of the VBSA is in alignment with the vision proposed by NEP 2020. Colleges and universities across the country are currently struggling under the weight of the NEP’s vision – which has skewed syllabi and curricula with diluted content, delayed admissions processes through a compromised common university entrance test (CUET) and left seats unfilled, increased costs of undergraduate education with an extra year of college but zero value addition under the four year programme, contractualized teaching positions through lopsided teaching workload across semesters, slashed public funding through proposals for college mergers and institutional loans from the Higher Education Financing Agency (HEFA), reduced the capacity of the research sector and curtailed research fellowships. Under such circumstances, the introduction of another disastrous reform move through the establishment of HECI will be the last nail in the coffin of Indian higher education.

Post-Independence, the historic purpose of nurturing Higher education through public spending has been to enable progressive social and material transformation that will eventually result in greater Equity between various interest-groups in Society. The Constitution had envisaged education as a public good – a means to ensure dignity and upward mobility to individuals and for strengthening the democracy. Education was seen as domain to be shared by the Centre and States. The VBSA Bill 2025 is a structural change, which will lead to extreme centralisation and commercialisation and privatisation of public funded HEIs as they will be pushed to be self-reliant.

As stakeholders, we appeal that the Bill to be referred to the Standing Committee so that teachers, students, and educationists are given enough opportunity to present their case.

Related:

Higher Education: How Centre is Undermining State Autonomy & Politicising UGC

Public Education is Not a Priority in Union Budget 2025-26

“We have come to save public education, shoot us if you will,” feisty JNUSU president Dhananjay challenges Delhi police

The post Over-centralisation, Unaccountability, Political Considerations & Control: Stakeholders critique the VBSA 2025 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The interesting part was that in the front of the processions were bullock carts in keeping with the tradition , unlike some other processions where they use mechanized vehicles. This makes our streets so lively, of course mostly we have bad traffic jams and things are bad. But these old traditions lend much colour to the otherwise drab lives of common people. In the West they have given up these traditions long ago, the streets are too sanitized, too orderly.

A Sandal Procession (Sandal Sharif) is a Sufi Islamic ritual where devotees carry fragrant sandalwood (Sandal/Chandan) paste in plates, often with incense, to anoint the tombs (dargahs) or walls of mosques belonging to Muslim saints during Urs (death anniversary) celebrations. It is a display of devotion, purity, and unity, sometimes integrated with local traditions, there is Hindu Muslim unity, the Mahim police station takes the lead in the organization.

Some people may scoff at the idea animals on the streets which they think should be reserved for their cars, forgetting that motor cars are big polluters and impose such heavy social costs.

With all the faults, traditionally Indians have a good relationship with domestic animals, on some days the bullocks are worshipped decorated, not burdened on the day of Pola in Maharashtra and there are similar days in other states.

Westerners with all their sophistication in certain matters had had a pretty unfriendly, even hostile relationship with animals like in bull fighting which involve so much violence and though horse racing appeals to so many people, it involves much cruelty to the animal which we never get to see.

As coincidence would have it I saw a fairly interesting film at Alliance Francaise earlier this week which showed a woman, the protagonist, who realizes the need to treat the bulls kindly in bull sports.

In the film Animal, the first local woman to enter the ring with the young men who tempt, chase and are chased by local bulls starts to see things from the bulls’ perspective as bulls go “rogue” and started goring and stamping the locals in the dark of night, long after the audience — mostly tourists — for some events has left.

The Camargue style of bullfighting is non-fatal, a lot less bloody and far and away a more humane and “even” contest and is thus referred to as “bull racing” by the locals, who enter the ring — basically unarmed and on foot — and try to snatch cash-prize tokens attached to the bull’s scalp.
But as experts point every year, approximately 180,000 bulls are killed in bullfights around the world, with many more killed or injured in bull fiesta events. Bullfighting is already banned by law in many countries including Argentina, Canada, Colombia, Cuba, Denmark, Italy and the United Kingdom.
Although legal in Spain, some Spanish cities, have outlawed the practice of bull fighting.

(From Vidyadhar Date’s page on Facebook)

Mahim Durgah, a Sufi Saint and a Mumbai police ritual

A colonial practice, this ritual of Mumbai’s top police officers walking to durgahs with an offering every year has continued –despite the serious fissures between the police administration and Mumbai’s (then Bombay’s Muslim minority) during the post-Babri Masjid demolitions in December 1992 and January 1993. Sections of an otherwise acclaimed police force were accused, and found by the Justice BN Srikrishna Commission of being guilty of deep anti-minority biases. The practice of officers offering the ceremonial chadar has continued and this year. Each year, as Urs begins at Mahim Dargah, in December, a scene plays out on the streets of Mumbai with a police band at the front, uniformed officers behind and senior police officers carrying a green chadar as they walk towards the 600-year-old shrine of Hazrat Makhdoom Ali Mahimi.

After Independence, while most government departments quietly shed the ceremonial and religious practices they had inherited from the British era a few exceptions endured, particularly at dargahs such as Mahim, and Dongri’s Rehman Shah Ba.

What is the legacy of the Mahim Dargah?

The Indian Express reports that the Mahim Dargah of Hazrat Makhdoom Ali Mahimi is one of Mumbai’s oldest and most historically revered Islamic shrines, with a lineage going back over 600 years. Long before Mumbai grew into a metropolis, this coastal dargah functioned as a spiritual anchor for sailors, traders, scholars and communities along the western coast. The saint himself was of Arab descent; his ancestors are believed to have arrived in India around AD 860 (AH 252) after fleeing the persecution of Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, the much-feared governor of Basra. Born roughly five centuries later in India, Makhdoom Ali Mahimi received rigorous training in Islamic law and theology and was eventually appointed the faqih, or law officer, for the Muslim community of Mahim. He passed away in 1431, and soon after his death, the local community built a mosque and shrine in his honour. Over the centuries, that shrine evolved into one of Mumbai’s most significant pilgrimage centres.

Related:

Preamble to be read at Mahim Dargah in Mumbai

A Mahim Dargah revered by Mumbai Police

The post Mian Maqdoom Shah shrine, Mumbai’s Mahim Durgah & the December Urs appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Supreme Court also directed a special court to conduct trial on a day-to-day basis to record the statements of the nine remaining witnesses. Langa has been ordered to extend full cooperation with the proceedings and seek no adjournment on the ground that his petition seeking the case be quashed is pending. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has been directed to file a status report on compliance with these directions. The matter has been listed for further consideration on January 6.

Langa had been arrested by the Gujarat Police last year in a case involving allegations of Goods and Services Tax (GST) fraud and was subsequently booked in multiple cases. The ED later registered a case against him under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). It was senior advocate Kapil Sibal appeared for Langa. Opposing the plea, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta alleged that Langa had extorted money, claiming that threats were made to publish adverse material if payments were not made. “A journalist is found to be extorting money… We want to file an additional counter,” Mehta told the court.

Sibal objected to the move, stating that the ED was seeking to change its stand. He argued that allegations of “Rs 68-crore fraud” were exaggerated, asserting that “it is not even Rs 68 lakh.” Sibal further pointed out that no charge sheet had been filed in the predicate offence forming the basis of the PMLA case. “I have been in custody since October 2024. For what offence? It is not murder,” he submitted, calling allegations of influencing witnesses “shocking”.

Sibal also alleged that crucial documents had not been furnished to the defence, stating that there was no supplementary complaint and that the prosecution could not “have it both ways”. Finally after heated exchanges in court and taking note of the fact that only nine witnesses remain to be examined, the court granted interim bail. During a brief exchange after the order, Mehta reiterated the allegation of extortion, to which Sibal responded by suggesting that industrialists were targeting journalists. Mehta denied any political motive, stating that the prosecution was acting purely in a professional capacity. When the exchange escalated, the CJI intervened, stressing that the trial must not be delayed and cautioning Langa against misusing his position as a journalist. Sibal responded that any such violation would be grounds for cancellation of bail.

The Gujarat high court had denied bail to Langa following which he had approached the Supreme Court.

Related:

“This system breaks the body when it cannot break the spirit” — Ipsa Shatakshi on her jailed husband, journalist Rupesh Kumar Singh

One more attack on the Media: Local journalist thrashed and urinated upon by railway police, UP

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

The post Interim bail to Gujarat journalist Mahesh Langa: SC appeared first on SabrangIndia.