The raids, conducted primarily in Muslim-dominated areas, have been criticised by all as biased and vindictive. Local Muslims describe the operation as a “witch hunt,” accusing the authorities of targeting their community under the guise of law enforcement. So far, the UPPCL claims to have uncovered power theft in numerous households, levying fines amounting to ₹1.3 crore. Several homes have had their power connections severed, leaving families in distress. Danish, a businessman from the area spoke to Maktoob media and voiced the community’s frustration: “Earlier, they used to demolish houses of Muslims. Now they are accusing us of power theft. They don’t want us to live peacefully.” 

Allegations against SP MP Zia-Ur-Rahman Barq- first rioting, now electricity theft

The most high-profile case involves Samajwadi Party MP Zia-Ur-Rahman Barq, whose home in Sambhal’s Deepa Sarai locality was raided by UPPCL officials accompanied by police. According to the authorities, Barq’s three-storey house was operating with two electricity meters, each with a capacity of just two kilowatts (kW), despite a load requirement of at least 16.5 kW. The electricity department alleged that the meters were tampered with, showing zero or minimal readings over the past six months. These discrepancies led to the disconnection of power and a hefty fine of ₹1.9 crore imposed on the MP.

Santosh Tripathi, the Sub-Divisional Officer of the electricity department spoke to multiple media houses and said, “A house of this size, equipped with air conditioners, refrigerators, and other electrical appliances, cannot function on such a low load. During inspections, we found that the meters registered zero consumption for six months.” Tripathi also alleged that solar panels installed at Barq’s residence were non-functional, further questioning the family’s explanation of their electricity usage.

However, Barq’s lawyer, Qasim Jamal, has rejected these allegations, asserting that the residence operates on two 4-kW meters, supplemented by a 10-kW solar panel and a 5-kW generator. “We will present all this evidence in court,” Jamal stated. Despite this defence, the authorities maintain their stance, with Additional Superintendent of Police Shrish Chandra affirming that evidence of tampering and unauthorised load has been documented.

Another threat FIR Against MP Zia-ur-Rahman Barq- another layer of targeted action

Pursuant to the electricity raid, The Uttar Pradesh police have lodged an FIR against Samajwadi Party MP Zia-ur-Rahman Barq and his father, Mamlook-ur-Rahman, accusing them of threatening and intimidating officials from the Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited (UPPCL). According to the complainants, UPPCL engineers V.K. Gangal and Ajay Sharma, who were inspecting the residence, faced threats from Mamlook-ur-Rahman. They allege that Mamlook told them he was recording their actions and warned that they would face consequences when the government changes. The engineers also claimed that the household was drawing over 16 kilowatts (kW) of power despite only being authorised for a 2-kW connection.

Notably, MP Barq denied the allegations, calling them politically motivated. He stated that the Yogi Adityanath government was targeting him for raising concerns about police violence during a controversial court-ordered survey of the Shahi Jama Masjid on November 24, which had resulted in the deaths of four Muslims. “I was not in Sambhal that day, yet the police booked me for instigating the mob. Now, they have filed another FIR against me. There is no power theft in my house; this is a false and motivated allegation,” Barq told reporters.

The FIR against Barq adds another dimension to the state’s actions against him. Already named in an FIR for allegedly instigating violence during the mosque survey, Barq has denied those charges as well, maintaining that he was not present in Sambhal at the time of the incident. He has challenged the accusations in the Allahabad High Court. However, the state has escalated its actions, first accusing him of power theft and now of threatening public servants.

The Shahi Jama Masjid survey itself has been a flashpoint in Sambhal, as it purportedly sought to determine whether the mosque was built by demolishing a temple during Mughal rule. The survey led to clashes between police and locals, with five Muslims killed and many others injured. Barq has been vocal in demanding justice for the victims, a stance he believes has made him a target for retribution.

Detailed reports on Sambhal may be read here and here.

This latest FIR reflects a pattern of suppressing dissent through legal and administrative means. For Barq, it underscores how opposition figures, particularly those raising issues affecting Muslim communities, are increasingly vulnerable to state-backed harassment. As he continues to contest these charges in court, the allegations against him and his family raise broader concerns about the use of legal mechanisms to silence critics and intimidate minorities.

Community concerns and broader implications

For the Muslim community in Sambhal, these allegations come amid heightened tensions following recent police violence. Many residents fear that the power theft crackdown is merely a continuation of the state’s efforts to marginalise them. The timing of these actions has further deepened suspicions. Shortly before the crackdown over electricity theft, a Hindu temple in Sambhal was reopened, with right-wing groups demanding surveys of surrounding areas and the removal of Muslim homes. Many have argued that the power theft raids and the accompanying media narrative serve to vilify Muslims and distract from the systemic targeting of their community.

The impact on residents has been severe. As per the report of the Indian Express, Idreesa, whose son was among those killed in November’s violence, has now been accused of power theft and fined ₹8,000. “They don’t want us to live peacefully,” said Zohaib, another resident, who noted that such actions are unprecedented in the region’s recent history.

The systematic nature of these raids, coupled with heavy police deployment, suggests an orchestrated effort to intimidate and harass the community. As demolitions face judicial oversight, electricity theft allegations are becoming a new weapon in the state’s arsenal, raising critical questions about the abuse of administrative power and the deepening marginalisation of minorities in Uttar Pradesh.

The strategic revival of the Shiv-Hanuman temple in Sambhal: A questionable timeline

The reopening of the Shiv-Hanuman temple in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, has raised serious concerns about the government’s intent and the communal implications of its actions. Uncovered during an anti-encroachment drive, the temple had reportedly been locked since 1978 following communal riots that displaced the local Hindu community. Now, decades later, its “rediscovery” has been celebrated by BJP leaders and the state administration as a reclaiming of “heritage,” yet this timeline raises critical questions about its timing and motive.

Notably, following the Supreme Court’s recent stay on surveys of religious places, which was issued to prevent further exacerbation of communal strife, the focus seems to have shifted. Instead of directly targeting contested religious structures, the administration has pivoted to reviving claims over existing sites like the Shiv-Hanuman temple. This new approach suggests an effort to sustain the communal polarisation agenda while adhering to the legal restrictions imposed by the apex court.

The temple’s reopening has been accompanied by heavy security, symbolic gestures, and an intensified narrative of reclaiming lost heritage. Political leaders like Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath and other BJP figures have positioned the event as a moment of historical justice. Statements about idols being destroyed and houses being built over the temple land are being amplified, with little evidence provided to substantiate these claims. These assertions are deeply polarising and appear designed to pit communities against each other, especially when made in the backdrop of ongoing administrative action against Muslims in the region.

The disturbing cycle of targeted actions continues

This temple revival is not an isolated incident. It coincides with an intensified crackdown on Muslim communities in Sambhal under the pretext of anti-encroachment and electricity theft drives. These actions are not just administrative measures but appear to be a systematic strategy to marginalise and intimidate Muslims in the region. Several houses and mosques in Muslim-majority areas were accused of electricity theft, with officials alleging they found numerous appliances connected to meters that were switched off. Heavy fines have been imposed, and power connections severed, further destabilising these communities.

Residents have called these actions targeted harassment. They argue that the state government is finding new ways to exert pressure after the Supreme Court barred arbitrary demolitions and surveys of religious sites. As provided by a report of Times of India, Muslim residents in the area, fearing the loss of their homes and belongings, have begun demolishing their own houses, which the administration claims were built on “encroached temple property.” Residents have expressed their helplessness, stating that self-demolition allows them to salvage some possessions before inevitable action by the authorities. This grim scenario highlights the disproportionate burden placed on vulnerable communities, who are left with no choice but to dismantle their lives under the shadow of state-sanctioned aggression. 

A pattern of marginalisation and state attempts to create division- UP government to revisit 1978 Sambhal communal riots cases

The Uttar Pradesh government’s plan to re-open the 1978 Sambhal communal riots cases appears to be another instance of selectively reviving historical incidents to fuel contemporary communal narratives. Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath’s statements linking Sambhal’s communal history to a broader pattern of victimisation of Hindus reinforce a polarising narrative that risks deepening existing tensions.

Adityanath’s claim that 209 Hindus were killed in communal riots in Sambhal since independence is framed to underline alleged historical injustices, but it sidesteps the broader and more complex realities of communal violence in the region. His assertion that the opposition has remained silent on Hindu casualties while showing concern over recent events not only politicises communal tragedies but also diverts attention from the need for accountability in handling current conflicts.

The decision to revisit the 1978 riots, while ostensibly aimed at ensuring justice, coincides with a series of administrative and legal measures in Sambhal that disproportionately target the Muslim community. Together, these actions create an atmosphere of communal antagonism rather than reconciliation.

Rather than fostering communal harmony or addressing systemic issues, re-opening the 1978 cases risks becoming a tool for perpetuating divisive narratives. Such a move underscores the need for caution and sensitivity in addressing communal histories to prevent further polarisation and escalation of tensions.

Related:

Supreme Court urges UP government to maintain peace and harmony in Sambhal, prohibits the trial court from taking any further steps till January

Sambhal Violence: State crackdown intensifies, thousands accused, and allegations of police misconduct ignite a political and communal crisis in Uttar Pradesh

Sambhal’s darkest hour: 5 dead, scores injured in Mosque survey violence as UP police face allegations of excessive force

Supreme Court issued stay on suits on survey against religious places, interventions had highlighted the Act’s intent to preserve India’s secular character

Supreme Court reinforces due process in demolition cases, lays down stringent guidelines to prevent arbitrary demolitions

The post Uttar Pradesh’s new tactics for harassment: Electricity theft charges, strategic revival of temple, opening up of 1978 Sambhal communal riots cases appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The violence erupted as an aftermath of the survey conducted on the Mosque premises based on a petition that was filed in the UP court urging for ASI survey of the mosque, claiming it had been built on the site of a Hindu temple. Tensions had been brewing in the area since the court directed the survey, which was initially conducted on November 19. A second survey, scheduled for November 24, led to protests as rumours spread that the mosque was being desecrated. The protests quickly escalated into violent clashes with the police, who responded with force, resulting in the deaths of the four victims. The police have insisted that the violence was a result of confrontations between the protestors, but the post-mortem reports confirmed that the victims died of gunshot wounds, and the allegations against the police have continued to mount.

In the aftermath of the violence, a slew of arrests has been made, including of political figures and activists. Samajwadi Party MP Ziaur Rahman Barq and the son of a local MLA, Sohail Iqbal, have been named in FIRs, accused of instigating the violence. The administration has deployed extensive efforts to track down and arrest the culprits, including offering rewards for information. Meanwhile, political leaders, including Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav, have raised serious concerns about the role of the state government in the incident, with some claiming that the violence was orchestrated and that the police were acting under political pressure. Allegations of threats against the families of victims, including the forced thumb impressions taken by police from the relatives of the deceased, have further complicated the situation, drawing calls for a Supreme Court-monitored investigation.

With conflicting reports from the police, local witnesses, and political figures, the situation in Sambhal has highlighted deepening divisions, questions of police accountability, and concerns over the administration’s handling of communal tensions in the region. As investigations continue, the community and political leaders alike are demanding justice for the victims and transparency in the probe.

Previous report may be read here.

Aggressive measures in Sambhal after violence

The Uttar Pradesh government is taking aggressive measures in response to the violent clashes in Sambhal on November 24, during the second round of the Shahi Mosque survey. The incident resulted in five deaths and many injured, which included a few police personnel’s, exposing deep fissures in the state’s handling of communal and political tensions.

As per media reports, A.K. Singh, Moradabad Divisional Commissioner, has now announced that authorities have identified 75 suspects through CCTV footage and videos, with ongoing efforts to identify more individuals. To aid their search for the suspects, their photographs will be displayed publicly on hoardings to solicit assistance to UP police in tracing and arresting them. Singh added that the administration also plans to recover damages caused to public property from those identified as perpetrators.

Heavy-handed measures: The Uttar Pradesh government’s response, which includes naming individuals in FIRs and publicly displaying photographs of suspected rioters, has raised serious concerns about due process and the implications of public shaming. The deployment of such measures suggests a push for rapid action but risks creating an atmosphere of fear and mistrust.

At least 25 individuals, including three women, have been arrested, with seven FIRs filed against 25 named individuals and around 3,000 unnamed ones. Among the accused are high-profile figures, including Samajwadi Party MP Zia-ur-Rehman Barq and Sohail Iqbal, son of seven-time MLA Iqbal Mehmood. While the state asserts that these measures aim to restore order and accountability, the move is being criticised as politically motivated and disproportionately harsh.

A government spokesperson confirmed that posters of the accused would be displayed in public, adding that rewards might be announced for information leading to their arrests. “The administration is committed to recovering damages and taking strict action against those responsible,” the spokesperson stated. However, critics argue that this approach risks stigmatising entire communities and escalating communal tensions.

Political fallout: The incident has sparked significant political outcry, particularly from the Samajwadi Party (SP). MP Zia-ur-Rehman Barq alleged that his inclusion in the FIR was part of a deliberate attempt to silence dissent and deflect from administrative failures. “The police are trying to scapegoat me to hide their incompetence. I will continue to fight for the rights and justice of my people,” Barq declared while speaking to Indian Express.

SP MP Dharmendra Yadav called for a Supreme Court-monitored probe, citing widespread mistrust in the state administration. “This investigation cannot be left to those who are complicit in the violence. Only an independent inquiry under judicial supervision can ensure justice,” he argued to the IE.

The state government’s stance has also drawn criticism from opposition MPs in Parliament. SP MP Dimple Yadav accused the administration of inhumane behaviour and demanded a full discussion on the Sambhal violence. “We will not allow this issue to be swept under the rug,” she said.

Allegations of involvement of political undertones: Adding to the complexity is the narrative pushed by the BJP-led state government, which attributes the violence to long-standing rivalries between two prominent families in Sambhal—the Barqs and the Khans. Minister Nitin Agarwal framed the incident as a “Turk vs Pathan” conflict, claiming that the violence stemmed from political dominance struggles between these communities.

The Barq family, descendants of the Turk community, and the Khan family, representing the Pathans, have been political adversaries for decades, as per the explanation provided by a member of the Yogi government. Zia-ur-Rehman Barq, the current MP, and Iqbal Mehmood, the MLA from Sambhal, represent these rival factions within the Samajwadi Party. This narrative, amplified by sections of the vernacular Hindi media, shifts the focus from administrative failures to communal rivalries, a move critics say is a calculated political distraction.

“The Turk-Pathan dispute has disrupted peace and endangered the safety of ordinary citizens,” Agarwal stated while taking to social media, commending the police for their swift action. However, this framing has been criticised for oversimplifying a complex situation and stoking communal divisions.

A pattern of escalation: The Sambhal violence is not an isolated incident but part of a broader trend of communal tensions in Uttar Pradesh. The state government’s reliance on aggressive policing, public shaming, and property recovery measures underlines a pattern of punitive action often disproportionately affecting minority communities. While these actions are framed as necessary for maintaining law and order, they also reveal a lack of trust in judicial and investigative processes.

The decision to suspend internet services in affected areas and maintain heavy police deployment underscores the administration’s precarious control over the situation. Despite claims of normalcy, these measures indicate a fragile peace, with tensions simmering beneath the surface.

The violence has exposed critical gaps in governance, including the lack of preventive measures and the failure to address underlying communal and political tensions. Instead of fostering dialogue and trust, the state’s response risks alienating communities further and exacerbating the divide.

The administration’s attempts to portray the incident as a product of local rivalries fail to address broader systemic issues. It also deflects accountability for law enforcement’s role in escalating tensions, a concern highlighted by opposition leaders and local residents alike.

Without a transparent and impartial investigation, the state risks deepening divisions and eroding public confidence in its ability to maintain peace and justice. The crackdown in Sambhal raises pressing questions about the balance between maintaining order and upholding democratic values, questions that the Uttar Pradesh government must confront with urgency and accountability.

Details about the FIRs file by the state police

A total of seven First Information Reports (FIRs) have been registered in connection with the violence that broke out in Sambhal, of which five are in Sambhal Kotwali and two in Nakhasa police station. Among those named in the FIRs are SP MP Zia-ur-Rehman Barq and Sohail Iqbal. Both are accused of inciting the mob violence that resulted in the deaths of four individuals and left many others, including police personnel, injured.

Incident and FIR Details: Advocate Qamar Hussain, who is involved in the case, spoke to SabrangIndia and provided them with details regarding the FIRs filed in the case. The FIR filed by Deputy Collector Ramesh Babu (FIR 336 filed in Sambhal PS) on November 24 describes the situation as follows: “Around 9:10 am, while the survey was being conducted in compliance with a directive from the court, a crowd of 800-900 unidentified individuals arrived at the Jama Masjid, reportedly armed with deadly weapons. The police and administrative officials, including Babu, tried to engage with the crowd and informed them that the survey was being conducted under a court order and that the mosque would not be harmed in any way. Despite these assurances, the crowd refused to disperse and continued to escalate the situation. The mob allegedly stole weapons and ammunition from the police, including a 9mm pistol, cartridges, a box of rubber bullets, and plastic pellets, which were reportedly used during the scuffle.”

Inspector Tomar, in FIR 337 filed in Sambhal PS, described the mob as “chanting religious slogans and moving towards the mosque with the intent to disrupt the survey.” Tomar also noted that the police attempted to reason with the crowd, but they were met with aggression and resistance. He further claimed that when the police declared the assembly unlawful and warned of the use of force, the mob began firing at the officers, leading to an intense confrontation. Tomar reported that many police officers were injured in the exchange, and the mob also damaged public and private property, including government vehicles. To control the situation, the police resorted to using water cannons, followed by the deployment of tear gas shells and rubber bullets, in line with orders from the District Magistrate to use “non-lethal force” in an attempt to disperse the crowd.

As provided by Advocate Qamar Hussain, in the two FIRs filed in the Nakhasa PS (FIR 304 and 305), three Muslim women have been identified in one and 6 Muslim men have been identified in the other, with a total of 350 people having been booked unidentified.

In FIR 334 of Sambhal PS, 800 unidentified people have been booked.

When asked by SabrangIndia if any case had been filed by the police against the group of people shouting the slogan of “Jai Shri Ram” while accompanying the survey team, Advocate Hussain said “there is no mention of these people anywhere. What can we even do? All the people accused and arrested are Muslims”.

Arrests and legal charges: As of now, 25 individuals have been arrested in connection with the violence, which includes 3 women and at least 3 minors. with charges under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (2023) BNS including Section 190 (vandalism), Section 191 (rioting), Section 132 (assaulting a public servant), Section 109 (attempt to murder), and Section 326-f (mischief by fire or explosives). Additionally, charges have been filed under the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, for the intentional destruction of property using fire or explosives, and the Arms Act, 1959, for the illegal possession and acquisition of firearms.

The ongoing investigation is being closely monitored, and authorities are considering the invocation of the stringent National Security Act (NSA) against those involved in the violence. Moradabad Divisional Commissioner Aunjaneya Kumar Singh confirmed that efforts are being made to identify and arrest all the perpetrators of the violence, with a heightened focus on accountability for those who caused damage to public property.

SP MP Zia-ur-Rehman Barq, condemned the survey and claimed that the violence was a premeditated attack against Muslims. He alleged that the survey was part of a broader effort to target the Muslim community, citing the way in which the Places of Worship Act had allegedly been violated. In his statement to the media, Barq argued that such actions were part of a wider pattern of marginalising Muslims in India. “People were stopped from offering Namaz, and the survey was conducted hastily without understanding the community’s concerns,” Barq stated. He also questioned the necessity of conducting a second survey, suggesting that the entire incident was orchestrated to inflame tensions.

Continuing investigation: The FIRs have named Barq and Sohail Iqbal, alongside 2,750 other unnamed individuals. The authorities are currently working to identify and apprehend more individuals involved in the violence. The investigation is still ongoing, and police are conducting further searches to gather evidence and identify additional suspects. The situation remains volatile, and the outcome of the investigation will likely have significant implications for both local governance and communal relations in the region.

Akhilesh Yadav’s criticism of Sambhal violence and police actions

Samajwadi Party (SP) chief and Kannauj MP, Akhilesh Yadav, has strongly criticised both the administration and the petitioners involved in the events that led to the violence in Sambhal on November 24, 2024. Yadav has accused the administration of mishandling the situation, which led to unnecessary bloodshed. As per reports, Yadav alleged that the police responded to stone-pelting by local residents by firing bullets from both their official and private weapons, an incident that he claimed was captured on video. Yadav’s accusations point to a grave misuse of power by the police, further aggravating the already volatile situation in Sambhal.

Political allegations and arrests: The violence has also sparked a political row, with several members of the Samajwadi Party, including MP Zia-ur-Rehman Barq, being arrested. Despite Barq’s absence from the scene, his name was included in the FIRs, which Yadav described as politically motivated. He questioned the integrity of the investigation, claiming that Barq had not even been in Sambhal during the violence. Yadav’s statement implies that the government is using these arrests as a means of political targeting rather than addressing the root causes of the violence.

Threats to victims’ families: One of the most disturbing allegations made by Yadav concerns the treatment of the families of victims. Yadav urged the Supreme Court to take cognizance of claims that the Uttar Pradesh Police had threatened the family members of Naeem, one of the five victims. According to media reports, around 20 policemen visited the family on the night of November 25, warning them against speaking to the media about the incident.

Naeem’s brother, Tasleem, who spoke to the Quint, claimed that the police had taken his thumb impression on a blank piece of paper. Tasleem, who is illiterate, expressed fear that the authorities might write something incriminating on the blank paper. Yadav condemned this action as a criminal act and called for immediate judicial intervention, urging the Supreme Court to hold those responsible accountable.

Naeem, a sweetmeat shop owner, was out buying groceries when the violence erupted as per the report of the Observer Post. His brother, Tasleem, has stated that Naeem was unaware of the clashes and was simply going about his daily routine when he was shot and killed by the police. Tasleem’s account paints a picture of an innocent man caught in a tragic and unnecessary escalation of violence, further fuelling the claims of police misconduct.

In his statements, Yadav underscored the need for judicial scrutiny of the entire incident, demanding accountability from the authorities and calling for the intervention of the Supreme Court to ensure that justice is served to the victims and their families. He concluded by expressing hope that the court would take cognizance of the situation and prevent such incidents from recurring in the future.

Questioning the survey and role of BJP activists: Yadav further questioned the necessity of conducting a second survey of the mosque, given that the first survey, conducted on November 19, had gone without incident. He argued that if a second survey was deemed necessary, the local administration should have consulted with the community to prevent unnecessary tensions. The lack of dialogue, according to Yadav, contributed to the violence.

Additionally, Yadav speculated that BJP activists may have been involved in the violence, suggesting that they were present during the second survey and were seen raising provocative slogans. He raised concerns about the administration’s failure to address these provocations, which, according to him, led to the escalation of the situation. Yadav’s comments highlight what he believes is a deliberate attempt by the administration to ignore the provocations and prevent the violence from being defused.

Yadav’s statements also carried a veiled criticism of Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath. He suggested that there is a political rift within the BJP leadership, particularly between the central leadership in Delhi and the state leadership in Lucknow. Yadav implied that this rift is exacerbating tensions in the state, with both factions engaged in a competition for political dominance. He criticized the BJP for using divisive tactics that undermine communal harmony, which he believes directly contributed to the unrest in Sambhal.

Arbitrary arrests

On Sunday night, Uttar Pradesh Police arrested Muslim activist Javed Mohammed for a Facebook post he shared regarding the recent violence in Sambhal, which resulted in the deaths of six Muslims. Mohammed’s post was reportedly critical of the police’s use of force during the protests against the survey of the Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal. The authorities accused him of spreading unrest and took action under Sections 126, 135, and 117 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which pertain to various offenses related to public order and incitement.

Mohammed was arrested from his rented residence in Prayagraj, a city in Uttar Pradesh. After his arrest, the police forced him to delete the Facebook post in question. Despite his arrest, he was granted bail on the next day itself, but he spent an additional day in custody due to his failure to meet the bail conditions. Specifically, he was unable to provide the required bail bond and two sureties at the time. Mohammed was then released on November 26, 2024, once he satisfied these bail requirements.

Javed Mohammed, 58, has a history of being a vocal critic of the Uttar Pradesh government, particularly its handling of Muslim issues. Notably, in June 2022, he was accused of being the “mastermind” behind a protest in Prayagraj that was sparked by derogatory remarks made by BJP leaders about Prophet Mohammed. The protest led to widespread unrest, and Mohammed was arrested on June 10, 2022, in connection with the event. He was imprisoned for 21 months before being granted bail in March 2024. In a related development, Mohammed’s family was allegedly subjected to mistreatment during his recent arrest. His wife and daughter were reportedly “illegally detained” by the police on the night he was taken into custody. According to reports, the police released them only after they were coerced into giving assurances that they would not return home or interfere with the demolition of their house, which was scheduled for the following day.

It is essential to note that Mohammed has vehemently denied all the allegations against him, asserting that they are politically motivated. He has also taken legal action against the demolition of his house, challenging it in court, calling the destruction of his property unlawful and an act of retaliation.

Claims of protestors firing at each other false: Zafar Ali, the chairperson of the Shahi Jama Masjid’s managing committee

On November 25, the administration in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, further found itself embroiled in controversy after Zafar Ali, the chairperson of the Shahi Jama Masjid’s managing committee, publicly accused the police of firing bullets at the crowd during the violent clash. Ali’s claims directly contradicted the police’s official narrative, which maintained that they had used only non-lethal methods such as tear gas, lathi-charge, and rubber pellet guns to disperse the crowd. Ali’s statements added to the tension, as they suggested the police were responsible for the deaths, not the protestors as the police had suggested.

Zafar Ali’s allegations and police response: Ali, in a press conference on November 25, had claimed that he had witnessed the police firing at the crowd during the chaos that erupted over the survey of the Shahi Jama Masjid. As per the report of The Wire, Ali had stated, “I saw that the police were firing bullets. It happened right in front of me. There was no bullet fired from the public in my presence.” This assertion directly contradicted the police’s statement, which claimed that the deaths were a result of gunfire from country-made weapons used by members of the mob. The police further suggested that the situation was chaotic, with individuals firing on each other, and assured that a magisterial probe would clarify the circumstances.

Following his public accusations, the police summoned Ali for questioning. The authorities also held their own press briefing, calling his allegations “misleading” and accusing them of being “politically motivated.” Despite the backlash, Ali was allowed to return home after his questioning, with the police clarifying that he had not been detained or arrested.

Police claims vs. Ali’s eyewitness account: The violence resulted in the deaths of four Muslim men, all of whom died from gunshot wounds. The police have suggested that the injuries were caused by bullets from country-made weapons, commonly known as “desi kattas,” which were reportedly in the hands of the protestors. However, Ali maintained that the police were armed with similar weapons and were the ones responsible for firing at the crowd. He further added that the police had also vandalised and set fire to their own vehicles near the mosque, casting doubt on the police’s account of events.

Ali’s account has raised questions about the authenticity of the police’s narrative. He questioned the logic behind the claim that protestors shot at each other, stating, “If they had to fire, they would have fired at the police and not the public. This is something to think about.” This contradiction between Ali’s statement and the police’s version has led to heightened scepticism regarding the actions of law enforcement on that day.

The lead-up to the violence- Rumours and miscommunication: In addition to his claims about the police’s actions during the incident, Ali also provided further context regarding the days leading up to the violence. He revealed that on the night of November 23, he had been informed by Sambhal’s Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM), Vandana Mishra, and Circle Officer (CO) Anuj Kumar Chaudhary, that a second survey of the Shahi Jama Masjid would take place the next morning. Ali stated that he had not given a “No Objection” to the survey, yet it went ahead regardless the following day.

The morning of the survey saw the area heavily surrounded by police, and Ali claimed that the SDM insisted on draining the water from the Hauz (water tank) even though the Superintendent of Police (SP) and District Magistrate (DM) had suggested that a simpler measurement could be taken with a stick. Ali’s description of the situation indicated a lack of coordination and communication between the local authorities and raised concerns about the handling of the survey.

Ali also pointed to the spread of a damaging rumour that claimed the Jama Masjid was being dug up without the court’s permission. This rumour caused panic in the community, and soon, large crowds began to gather near the mosque. According to Ali, this rumour sparked the violence and chaos that ultimately led to the deaths and injuries. The misinformation surrounding the mosque’s survey may have been a key factor in escalating the situation from a routine survey to a violent confrontation.

The conflicting statements from Zafar Ali and the police have only added to the tension and confusion surrounding the incident. While the police have promised a thorough investigation, including a magisterial probe, the allegations against them remain unresolved. Ali’s eye-witness testimony, combined with the rumoured causes of the violence, calls into question the transparency and fairness of the police’s actions during the event. As the investigation continues, the community and the wider public await further clarity on the role the police played in the tragic events of November 24.

Addressing the fault lines- Need of the hour

The Sambhal violence serves as a stark reminder of the deep communal, political, and administrative fissures in Uttar Pradesh. The state government’s aggressive response—ranging from arrests and FIRs to public shaming and punitive measures—underscores its prioritisation of swift action over due process. However, these tactics risk further alienating communities, exacerbating tensions, and eroding public trust in the justice system.

The framing of the violence as a result of local rivalries, while politically expedient, deflects attention from the systemic failures in governance and law enforcement. Allegations of police misconduct, coupled with the narrative of communal rivalries, reveal a troubling pattern where accountability is side-lined in favour of divisive rhetoric.

Calls for a Supreme Court-monitored investigation highlight the widespread mistrust in the state administration’s ability to impartially handle the situation. Without a transparent, unbiased inquiry into the events leading up to and during the violence, the cycle of mistrust and division is likely to persist.

The Sambhal incident is not an isolated case but part of a broader trend of escalating communal tensions and heavy-handed responses in Uttar Pradesh. For long-term peace and stability, the state must address the underlying causes of these tensions, foster dialogue, and rebuild trust in democratic institutions. Balancing law and order with the protection of constitutional rights is essential to prevent such incidents from becoming recurring flashpoints in an already polarised environment.

Related:

Uttarakhand High Court orders security, condemns hate speech over Uttarkashi Mosque

Divided & strife-torn Manipur: intensified violence, abdication by state & union governments, demands of accountability from BJP MLAs

Rajasthan HC finds no caste intent in words like ‘Bhangi’, ‘Neech’, ‘Bhikhari’, ‘Mangani’, drops SC/ST Act charges

The post Sambhal Violence: State crackdown intensifies, thousands accused, and allegations of police misconduct ignite a political and communal crisis in Uttar Pradesh appeared first on SabrangIndia.

This tragedy is not just about the lives lost but also about the failure of those tasked with protecting lives and maintaining order. The administration insists it used “minor force” to quell the protests, but eyewitness accounts and on-ground visuals tell a different story—one of heavy-handedness, tear gas, pellet guns, and a disregard for measured restraint. Instead of calming tensions, the police’s actions escalated the violence, turning a fragile situation into a full-blown disaster. Families of the deceased, already reeling from grief, are now grappling with the knowledge of the state, which should have protected their loved ones, may have caused to their deaths.

While officials insist that gunfire originated solely from the protesters, autopsy reports indicating deaths caused by .315 bore firearms undermine this assertion and cast doubt on the legitimacy of their account.

गोली चलाओ, मारो-मारो…भो&&& वालों को

सोचिए वर्दी के पीछे छिपी ये मानसिकता कानून या न्याय कैसे कर सकती है?

स़भल म़े एक पुलिस वाले को सुनिए pic.twitter.com/ZbCGa6fDqB

— Nigar Parveen (@NigarNawab) November 24, 2024

The premature and unprovoked lathi charges seen in other videos only added fuel to the fire. Peaceful protesters, raising slogans with no evidence of stone-pelting, were subjected to indiscriminate violence by law enforcement. These actions turned what could have remained a peaceful demonstration into a violent confrontation, marking a failure of the police to fulfil their primary duty of maintaining order without escalating tensions.

#Sambhal, UP:
Video 1) Sambhal SP Krishan Kumar Bishnoi claims “bheed ke kuch log achanak galiyo me se nikalker aaye aur unhone police per pathrav kiya”.

Video 2) Protestors can be seen raising slogans and not a single stone was pelted yet the police resorted to lathicharge.… pic.twitter.com/4xB06vQYMu

— Saba Khan (@ItsKhan_Saba) November 24, 2024

Sambhal, a district with a long-standing reputation for communal harmony, now stands fractured and traumatised. This devastating episode highlights systemic failures at multiple levels: an administration that rushed into action without adequate preparation, a police force that abandoned the principles of restraint and accountability, and a judicial system whose hasty orders acted as a spark in a tinderbox. As the dust settles, the scars left behind by the violence in Sambhal will serve as a grim reminder of how easily institutional failures can upend lives, disrupt communities, and tarnish the very fabric of democracy.

#WATCH | Uttar Pradesh: Visuals from Sambhal where an incident of stone pelting took place when a survey team arrived at the Shahi Jama Masjid to conduct a survey of the mosque. Police used tear gas to control the situation.

Following a petition filed by senior advocate Vishnu… pic.twitter.com/jW6RO6L27Q

— ANI (@ANI) November 24, 2024

Reacting immediately and sharply to the violence, a day after the results to nine by-polls in the state, including the Sambhal seat were declared, Member of Parliament and Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav also criticised the Uttar Pradesh state government, alleging that the BJP had orchestrated the violence to divert attention from electoral malpractices and governance failures. Yadav has urged the Supreme Court to take immediate cognisance of the situation, calling for an independent investigation into the incidents. By-polls in UP had taken place on November 20.

“The conspiracy to spread tension in the name of a mosque survey cannot go unchecked. The BJP government and its administration orchestrated this violence to deflect attention from their political manipulations and failures,” Yadav said.

He described the police actions as disproportionate and part of a broader strategy by the BJP to create polarisation for political gain. Yadav emphasised that the BJP had no interest in genuine conflict resolution and instead sought to use communal tension to strengthen its political narrative.

सर्वे के नाम पर तनाव फैलाने की साज़िश का ‘सर्वोच्च न्यायालय’ तुरंत संज्ञान ले और जो अपने साथ सामाजिक सद्भाव बिगाड़ने के उद्देश्य से नारेबाज़ों को ले गये, उनके ख़िलाफ़ शांति और सौहार्द बिगाड़ने का मुक़दमा दर्ज हो और उनके ख़िलाफ़ ‘बार एसोसिएशन’ भी अनुशासनात्मक और दंडात्मक कार्रवाई… pic.twitter.com/9Fj30K4aLm

— Akhilesh Yadav (@yadavakhilesh) November 24, 2024

संभल में शांति की अपील के साथ ही ये भी अपील है कि कोई भी इंसाफ़ की उम्मीद न छोड़े। नाइंसाफ़ी का हुक्म ज़्यादा दिन नहीं चलता सरकार बदलेगी और न्याय का युग आएगा। pic.twitter.com/XE99C72zw9

— Akhilesh Yadav (@yadavakhilesh) November 24, 2024

Fatalities and injuries raise alarm

The district of Sambhal in Uttar Pradesh descended into violence on Sunday, November 24, after a court-ordered survey of the Mughal-era Jama Masjid escalated into violent clashes. By the morning of November 25, the death toll had risen to five, though Moradabad Divisional Commissioner Aunjaneya Kumar Singh officially acknowledged only four. He revealed that one family neither informed the police nor submitted the body for autopsy, raising concerns over transparency and accountability in the administration’s handling of the crisis.

Among the deceased were Naeem (Kot Kurvi locality), Bilal (Sarai Tareen), and Numan (Hayat Nagar), their families grieving the loss of loved ones amidst a turmoil that, many argue, could have been avoided. Injuries from the clashes were widespread, with reports indicating that 20 police personnel, including senior officers, sustained injuries. Officials claimed these injuries resulted from “miscreant gunfire,” but widespread public scepticism has arisen due to video evidence showing police firing live ammunition.

A tragic reflection of police mismanagement and deep contradictions

The tragic events in Sambhal, where five individuals lost their lives and scores were injured, expose a troubling pattern of administrative failure and blatant contradictions in the actions and narratives of law enforcement. What should have been a peaceful legal procedure—a court-ordered survey of a mosque—devolved into chaos, violence, and death. The cracks in the police’s official account, highlighted by eyewitness testimony and video evidence, paint a picture of a deeply flawed approach that not only failed to prevent violence but actively exacerbated it.

The spark for the unrest was a sudden petition claiming that the Jama Masjid stood on the site of a Harihar temple, prompting a court to order an immediate survey, without giving a hearing to the other side (Mosque Committee). The survey nevertheless took place with the local community cooperating fully. Tensions had been simmering since the initial survey earlier in the week. On Sunday, as the survey team arrived, flanked by police and other officials, the situation escalated. According to police accounts, crowds of protesters began gathering near the mosque, shouting slogans and allegedly hurling stones. Divisional Commissioner Singh described the scene as a “coordinated attack” on the police and survey team, alleging that three separate groups launched assaults from different directions. Police officials, including Superintendent of Police Krishna Kumar Vishnoi, claimed to have used only “minor force” to disperse the crowd, including tear gas and lathi charges. However, these claims fall apart under scrutiny when juxtaposed with the evidence emerging from the ground.

The police, has been silent on the questioning and deeply troubling presence of unauthorised individuals accompanying the survey team and chanting the polarising slogan “Jai Shri Ram.” In today’s fraught socio-political climate, this chant, while religious for some, has become a symbol of majoritarian aggression. For it to resound during a legally sensitive survey of a disputed mosque was not only inflammatory but deeply irresponsible. These individuals, unauthorised to participate in the survey process, actively inflamed tensions, turning what should have been a neutral court-directed operation into a spectacle of intimidation. The administration’s failure to restrain them reflects a troubling bias and raises critical questions: Who allowed these individuals to accompany the team, and why was their inflammatory behaviour permitted in an already charged environment?

जब सर्वे करने जा रहे थे तो ये नारेबाज़ी क्यूं हुई?
क्या कोर्ट का आर्डर था कि जय श्रीराम का नारा लगाते हुए जाएं?
साफ़ दिख रहा है कि उद्देश्य भड़काना था। #Sambhalpic.twitter.com/xD4JMD3eBT

— Tarun Gautam (@TARUNspeakss) November 24, 2024

Social media is awash with disturbing videos that directly challenge the police narrative and point to excessive use of force. One particularly harrowing clip shows riot-gear-clad officers cornering individuals in narrow smoke-filled alleys, firing indiscriminately with live rounds, raising serious concerns about the proportionality of the police response. Another video captures officers pulling individuals from a peaceful protest and beating them with batons, despite there being no visible provocation. Such scenes starkly contradict police claims of restraint and raise pressing questions about accountability.

In another video, which is a drone footage of the Sambhal violence shot during the survey being conducted by the team of advocate commissioner, a cleric could be heard requesting the mob, vandalising a car parked near the mosque, to disperse.

Drone footage of the Sambhal violence shot during the survey being conducted by the team of advocate commissioner. A cleric could be heard requesting the mob, vandalising a car parked near the mosque, to disperse. pic.twitter.com/ja45VOqisK

— Piyush Rai (@Benarasiyaa) November 25, 2024

The videos, eyewitness testimonies, and the administration’s actions expose the glaring disconnect between the police’s claims and the reality on the ground. They paint a damning picture of an institution unprepared and unwilling to uphold its duty of impartiality and restraint. Sambhal’s tragedy is a grim indictment of law enforcement’s failure to protect lives and ensure fairness, leaving deep scars on a community already grappling with distrust and fear. This incident underscores an urgent need for accountability and systemic reform, lest such tragedies continue to erode the very fabric of justice and democracy.

In view of these contradictions, District Magistrate Manish Pensiya’s statements about maintaining “communal harmony” ring hollow when juxtaposed with the state’s heavy-handed approach. The administration’s failure to anticipate the volatile situation, despite clear signs of tension in the days leading up to the survey, reveals a glaring lack of foresight and preparation. 

Jama Masjid in Chandausi: A heritage monument caught in the crossfire

The Jama Masjid in Chandausi, located in Uttar Pradesh’s Sambhal district, is not just a religious edifice but a nationally recognised heritage monument. Declared a “protected monument” under the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act of 1904, it has held this status since December 22, 1920. The mosque, prominently featured on the Archaeological Survey of India’s (ASI) Agra Circle website, represents architectural brilliance and historical significance. Yet, this symbol of India’s shared cultural legacy is now at the centre of a highly contentious legal and communal battle.

Allegations that the mosque was constructed over the ruins of an alleged Hindu temple dedicated to Lord Harihar have placed it under a spotlight fraught with historical revisionism, legal dilemmas, and communal discord. The claim, rooted in assertions that the temple was destroyed by Mughal Emperor Babur in 1529, has been amplified by a petition filed by eight individuals, several of whom have a history of involvement in contentious disputes over religious sites. Their demands range from recognising the mosque as a temple to permitting Hindu worship at the site.

This case raises significant concerns about the preservation of heritage, judicial accountability, and the ethical responsibility of maintaining communal harmony. One can say that the legal proceedings surrounding the Jama Masjid reflect an erosion of procedural fairness, with decisions appearing to prioritise political expediency over historical or legal integrity.

The judicial response and its fallout: The controversy deepened when, on November 19, 2024, Civil Judge (Senior Division) Aditya Singh issued an immediate directive to survey the mosque based on the petitioners’ claims, without serving notice or hearing the other side. Within hours, an Advocate Commissioner was appointed, and a survey was ordered to include videography and photography. While ostensibly aimed at determining the mosque’s historical foundations, this decision has been criticised for its unprecedented speed and lack of procedural safeguards.

Key issues surrounding the court’s response include:

1. Bypassing procedural norms: The court did not provide adequate time for the mosque committee, ASI, or other stakeholders to respond to the allegations. The hurried survey order—issued on the same day the petition was filed—raises questions about judicial neutrality and accountability, especially in a case involving a monument of national importance.
2. Contravention of monument protection laws: The Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904, strictly prohibits unauthorised surveys, excavations, or alterations to protected sites. The court’s directive, issued without explicit approval from the ASI, undermines these protections and sets a potentially dangerous precedent.
3. Most questionably, the order defied the basics of natural justice as it did not hear the Mosque Committee before passing the order.
4. Encouraging polarising agendas: By validating the claims of the petitioners without substantial evidence, the judiciary inadvertently bolstered narratives that aim to communalise historical monuments. Such actions risk normalising attempts to reinterpret historical legacies through a divisive lens.
5. Judicial overreach: The judiciary’s role as an impartial arbiter appears compromised in this instance. The extraordinary haste with which the survey was ordered has led to widespread scepticism about the court’s motivations, further eroding public trust in its independence.

It is essential to that the individuals behind the petition include figures like Advocate Hari Shankar Jain, known for his involvement in controversial and high-profile disputes such as the Gyanvapi Mosque-Kashi Vishwanath case. Their claims, often rooted in unverified assertions of historical wrongs, form part of a larger pattern aimed at reclaiming purported Hindu heritage sites. The said strategy is less about historical accuracy and more about advancing a communal agenda that deepens societal divides. The broader implications of such cases are profound, the present one can even call it violence as a consequence of judicial haste. They risk transforming judicial processes into tools for majoritarian politics, undermining the secular fabric of the Constitution. In recent times, there have been repeated cautions against using history as a battleground for contemporary disputes, but these warnings seem increasingly unheeded in the current climate.

Opposition criticises UP government over Sambhal violence, alleges conspiracy

The violence in Uttar Pradesh’s Sambhal district has drawn sharp criticism from opposition leaders, who have accused Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath and the ruling BJP government of orchestrating unrest under the guise of conducting a court-ordered mosque survey. Congress and Samajwadi Party leaders have described the incident as a deliberate attempt to incite communal tensions and destabilise the region’s long-standing harmony.

Congress terms it a “well-planned conspiracy”: Congress leader Pawan Khera condemned the Sambhal violence in unequivocal terms, calling it a “well-planned conspiracy” by the Yogi Adityanath-led government. Khera, Chairman of the Media and Publicity Department of the All India Congress Committee (AICC), accused the state administration of fostering a climate of fear and violence.

“No citizen in Uttar Pradesh is ‘safe’ under CM Adityanath, who gave the reprehensible slogan of ‘Batenge toh Katenge’ (Those who divide will die). This is evident from the deplorable incidents in Sambhal today,” Khera said in a strongly worded statement.

Referring to widely circulated videos of police allegedly firing at protesters, Khera argued that these visuals reveal the “horrifying result of a well-planned conspiracy” by the BJP and RSS. He claimed the violence in Sambhal was orchestrated to fracture the communal harmony of western Uttar Pradesh, a region historically known for its peace and goodwill.

Khera went further, alleging that the BJP government had no intention of resolving the mosque dispute in a just or peaceful manner. “In this entire matter, the BJP neither wanted the survey to proceed nor to stop it; its sole objective was to destroy harmony,” he asserted.

The Congress leader further accused the BJP of perpetuating hatred and systematically targeting minority communities, calling the Modi-Yogi administration a “double-assault government” that considers minorities as second-class citizens.

Khera criticised the judiciary’s role, stating that the court’s order for an immediate survey of the mosque came without giving the mosque committee or local Muslim leaders a fair hearing. He claimed that this rushed decision was a deliberate strategy by the government to provoke unrest.

“It is public knowledge that the court ordered an immediate survey without hearing the other side. No action was taken against the rioters who accompanied the survey team, making it clear that the Yogi government has intensified the politics of violence and hatred post the state by-elections,” Khera remarked.

Khera also invoked Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s campaign against divisive politics, urging the people of Sambhal to reject hatred. “Rahul Gandhi has continuously spoken about ‘Nafrat Ke Bazaar Mein Mohabbat Ki Dukaan’ (spreading love in a marketplace of hatred). In this spirit, I appeal to the people of Sambhal to maintain unity, amity, and harmony while legally protecting their rights,” he said.

Our statement on the tragic and avoidable riots in Sambhal:

संभल में हुए दुखद एवं परिहार्य दंगों पर कांग्रेस पार्टी का वक्तव्य: pic.twitter.com/uOpKjYbw8g

— Pawan Khera (@Pawankhera) November 24, 2024

Congress leaders Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra also took to ‘X’ to share their displeasure on the manner in which the UP government handled the situation.

संभल, उत्तर प्रदेश में हालिया विवाद पर राज्य सरकार का पक्षपात और जल्दबाज़ी भरा रवैया बेहद दुर्भाग्यपूर्ण है। हिंसा और फायरिंग में जिन्होंने अपनों को खोया है उनके प्रति मेरी गहरी संवेदनाएं हैं।

प्रशासन द्वारा बिना सभी पक्षों को सुने और असंवेदनशीलता से की गई कार्रवाई ने माहौल और…

— Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) November 25, 2024

संभल, उत्तर प्रदेश में अचानक उठे विवाद को लेकर राज्य सरकार का रवैया बेहद दुर्भाग्यपूर्ण है। इतने संवेदनशील मामले में बिना दूसरा पक्ष सुने, बिना दोनों पक्षों को विश्वास में लिए प्रशासन ने जिस तरह ​हड़बड़ी के साथ कार्रवाई की, वह दिखाता है कि सरकार ने खुद माहौल खराब किया। प्रशासन ने…

— Priyanka Gandhi Vadra (@priyankagandhi) November 25, 2024

A broader pattern of state-endorsed violence: Both opposition parties have pointed to a recurring pattern in the BJP’s approach to governance in Uttar Pradesh, accusing the Yogi administration of fostering communal divisions as a political tool. Khera and Yadav highlighted how incidents like the violence in Sambhal have become disturbingly frequent, where minorities bear the brunt of state actions.

Khera stated that the BJP government has intensified its communal agenda following recent by-elections, further eroding trust between communities. “The BJP is guilty of setting fire to the peace and harmony of Sambhal. Their communal politics is a calculated attempt to keep society fractured and polarised,” Khera argued.

The opposition’s critique of the Sambhal violence has raised serious questions about the handling of the incident by the state government. Both Congress and the Samajwadi Party have demanded accountability from the Yogi administration and a fair inquiry into the events leading to the violence.

With videos and eyewitness accounts contradicting police narratives, the demand for an impartial investigation is gaining traction. Meanwhile, the incident has further polarised an already charged political environment, with the opposition accusing the BJP of prioritising its communal agenda over the welfare and safety of the state’s citizens.

Sambhal District under strict restrictions amid post-riot tensions

In the wake of the recent violent clashes during the court-mandated mosque survey, authorities in Sambhal district have implemented stringent measures to restore order and prevent further unrest. The district administration has imposed prohibitory orders, restricted movement of outsiders, suspended internet services, and issued a series of directives to curb potential threats.

As per multiple media news, the Sambhal District Magistrate has issued a formal notification barring the entry of external individuals, social organisations, or public representatives into the district without prior approval. The notification, dated October 1, 2024, and referenced as order number 942/Judicial Assistant/Section-163/2024, aims to contain the volatile situation in the region.

“A prohibitory order under Section 163 of the Indian Citizens Security Code, 2023, has been imposed in Sambhal district and will remain effective until November 30,” the circular states. It further specifies, “No external person, social organisation, or public representative will be allowed to enter the district without the explicit permission of the competent authority. Violating this order will be treated as a punishable offence under Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.”

The directive underscores the urgency of maintaining order and preventing external influences from exacerbating the fragile situation. Officials have emphasised that the order is integral to the overarching prohibitory measures implemented in early October and is to be enforced immediately.

In addition to this, internet services across the district have been suspended for 24 hours. The temporary shutdown is intended to curb the spread of misinformation, inflammatory content, and the organisation of disruptive activities through social media platforms.

In a parallel move, the district administration has issued strict prohibitions on the possession or collection of materials that could be used as projectiles or weapons. A notice issued by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) explicitly bans citizens from purchasing or stockpiling stones, soda bottles, or any flammable or explosive substances.

The notice warns of strict action against violators, including legal penalties. To reinforce this measure, local municipal authorities have been directed to confiscate construction materials, such as loose bricks or debris, found lying on roads or in public areas.

Detentions and targeted legal actions: As per the UP police statement, the district police have intensified their operations to identify and detain individuals involved in Sunday’s violent clashes. According to the Superintendent of Police, around 20 individuals have been taken into custody so far. These arrests follow allegations of stone-pelting and acts of violence that occurred during the controversial survey of the mosque. The officials have announced plans to charge those detained under the National Security Act (NSA). While law enforcement claims this is necessary to deter future violence, many view it as an overreach designed to intimidate dissenters. The administration has also issued warnings against spreading rumours, threatening legal action against anyone found inciting unrest through social media.

Law enforcement officials have assured the public that further arrests will follow as investigations progress. The local administration has also deployed additional police forces in sensitive areas to maintain peace and deter further incidents. Yet, these measures fail to address the fundamental questions of police misconduct and administrative failure. By focusing solely on punitive actions against protesters, the state has sidestepped its responsibility to investigate its own role in escalating the violence.

Police defence

The deaths in Sambhal, including that of Naeem, have become a flashpoint of conflicting narratives between law enforcement and the victim’s family. Naeem’s parents have accused the police of fatally shooting their son, arguing that his death was the result of unwarranted police firing. Divisional Commissioner Aunjaneya Kumar Singh, however, vehemently denied the allegations, stating that police injuries sustained during the clashes make it implausible for officers to have been the aggressors. “Police cannot shoot at themselves,” Singh asserted, referencing the injuries suffered by law enforcement, including the SP’s Public Relations Officer, who was shot in the leg, and other officers who sustained pellet wounds and fractures. Singh also attempted to deflect blame onto Naeem’s family, stating, “It was the responsibility of the family members to restrain their son if he was planning to throw stones.”

Superintendent of Police (SP) Krishna Kumar Bishnoi added to the official narrative, maintaining that the police employed only pellet guns for crowd control during the clashes.

In one video of SP Krishan Kumar, he can be seen using a loudspeaker to urge the alleged stone-pelters not to indulge in violence.

“Do not spoil your future for these politicians,” he is heard saying through his megaphone in one of the videos.

“नेताओं के चक्कर में अपना भविष्य बर्बाद मत करो” @sambhalpolice
संभल में पथराव और आंसू गैस छोड़ने के बाद हालात बेकाबू, एक गाड़ी में लगाई आग, शांति व्यवस्था की की जा रही अपील। #SambhalJamaMasjid pic.twitter.com/4wksw3zpN4

— Awanish M Vidyarthi (@awanishvidyarth) November 24, 2024

Despite these official accounts, Singh painted a broader picture of chaos, claiming, “There were three groups who were firing at each other. We have evidence, but our priority right now is to restore peace.” This assertion seeks to shift attention away from the police and onto unidentified groups allegedly involved in the violence. Yet, this explanation does little to address the critical question of how Naeem and others sustained gunshot wounds if the police only used pellet guns and tear gas.

#WATCH | Uttar Pradesh: Sambhal DM Rajender Pensiyia says “The survey has been completed. The survey team have been safely taken out. The situation is being brought under control. Strict action will be taken against mischievous elements. No one will be spared.” https://t.co/fsngBQoyfC pic.twitter.com/7RvLNNERKA

— ANI (@ANI) November 24, 2024

Meanwhile, Singh confirmed to PTI that several police personnel had sustained injuries, including the PRO (Public Relations Officer) of the SP, who had been shot in the leg. Additionally, the police circle officer was struck by pellets, a constable suffered a severe head injury, and the deputy collector sustained a fractured leg. Singh’s emphasis on the injuries to police personnel served to bolster the administration’s stance that the violence originated from the protesters, not the authorities.

The conflicting statements from law enforcement officials, combined with the autopsy findings and eyewitness accounts, create a troubling narrative. The administration’s insistence on the protesters’ culpability is sharply contradicted by emerging evidence, including visual records of officers firing live rounds in smoke-filled streets. Singh’s comments, such as suggesting families “restrain” their loved ones, have been widely criticised as attempts to deflect accountability. These discrepancies, coupled with the police’s refusal to address these contradictions transparently, have only deepened public distrust and magnified calls for an independent investigation to establish the truth behind the tragic events in Sambhal.

An uncertain path ahead

As Sambhal grapples with the aftermath of Sunday’s clashes, the district remains on edge. The closure of schools and markets reflects a community paralysed by fear and uncertainty. While the administration insists it is working to restore normalcy, its actions have done little to inspire confidence. The incident in Sambhal is a stark reminder of the volatile interplay between legal disputes over religious sites and the state’s handling of communal tensions. It also underscores the urgent need for accountability in law enforcement, especially in sensitive situations where lives are at stake. Until these issues are addressed, legally and constitutionally, incidents like these will continue to mar the state’s fragile social fabric.

Related:

Uttarakhand High Court orders security, condemns hate speech over Uttarkashi Mosque

Divided & strife-torn Manipur: intensified violence, abdication by state & union governments, demands of accountability from BJP MLAs

Rajasthan HC finds no caste intent in words like ‘Bhangi’, ‘Neech’, ‘Bhikhari’, ‘Mangani’, drops SC/ST Act charges

The post Sambhal’s darkest hour: 5 dead, scores injured in Mosque survey violence as UP police face allegations of excessive force appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Educational institutions to remain closed until November 23: As a precautionary measure, the Manipur government has ordered the closure of schools, colleges, and universities in the Imphal Valley until November 23. An official notification issued by Daryal Juli Anal, Joint Secretary of the Higher and Technical Education Department, cited concerns over the safety of students, teachers, and staff amid the ongoing curfew.

The decision was influenced by the widespread violence in several districts, particularly Imphal East and Imphal West, following the recovery of the missing bodies on November 15 and 16. The government decided to prioritise safety, suspending all educational activities in government and government-aided institutions, including state universities, in the affected districts.

The letter by elected MLAs may be read here

Timeline of escalating violence in Manipur following Jiribam attack

The recent cycle of violence that engulfed Manipur from November 7, 2024, began with a harrowing incident in Zairawn village, Jiribam district. A Hmar woman, a schoolteacher and mother of three, was allegedly raped, shot in the leg, killed, and set ablaze by unidentified attackers. The Hmar community, a subgroup of the Kuki-Zo ethnic group, was devastated by this act, and Kuki civil society groups quickly attributed the crime to Meitei militants.

The initial attack and looting: In the aftermath of the incident, the assailants reportedly torched 19 houses, looted cash, stole mobile phones, LPG cylinders, and six two-wheelers, and even killed village dogs. Some residents alleged negligence on the part of the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) stationed in Zairawn, accusing them of failing to intervene despite being capable of protecting the village. The violence escalated when suspected Kuki militants retaliated by targeting Meitei individuals in the district.

Retaliatory killings and unrest in Bishnupur: On November 9, the violence intensified as a Meitei woman working in a paddy field in Bishnupur district was allegedly shot dead by suspected Kuki militants. Two days later, on November 11, the CRPF killed 10 suspected Kuki militants in a confrontation in Jiribam. According to police reports, the militants were armed with automatic weapons and a rocket-propelled grenade (RPG) and had attacked the Borobekra police station and a CRPF camp in Jakuradhor. These assailants were believed to have travelled from Kuki-dominated districts such as Churachandpur and Pherzawl.

Displacement and missing persons: During the same encounter, three women and three children, including an eight-month-old baby, went missing. These individuals were among 13 displaced Meiteis seeking refuge in a relief camp located near the Borobekra police station and a CRPF post. Their disappearance further fuelled ethnic tensions in the region.

Jiribam, a district with a multi-ethnic population comprising Meitei, Kuki-Zo, Naga, and other communities, had remained relatively peaceful until June 2024. However, tensions erupted earlier this year when the body of a Kuki teenager was discovered in a river, allegedly killed by Meitei armed groups. Shortly after, the body of a Meitei man was found, reportedly in retaliation by Kuki militants.

Discovery of bodies and public outrage: On November 15, three bodies—those of a woman and two children—were discovered floating in the Barak River in Assam’s Cachar district. These were confirmed to belong to the missing family. The discovery triggered widespread protests in Imphal, with enraged mobs ransacking the homes of three legislators, including R.K. Imo, a BJP MLA and son-in-law of Chief Minister N. Biren Singh. Protesters also targeted the residences of Y. Khemchand, the Minister of Municipal Administration, and L. Susindro Singh, the Minister of Consumer Affairs, prompting security forces to use tear gas to disperse the crowds.

The unrest escalated further when protesters marched toward Manipur CM Biren Singh’s ancestral home in Luwangshangbam, only to be stopped by security forces.

Continued violence and accusations: On November 17, the bodies of another woman and child from the missing family were recovered in Lakhipur, bringing the total to six victims—all from the same family. The Indigenous Tribal Leaders’ Forum (ITLF), a prominent Kuki-Zo organisation, accused Meitei assailants of setting fire to five churches, a school, a petrol pump, and 14 tribal homes in Jiribam.

Meanwhile, in Imphal, a mob targeted the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) office in Haraorok, Imphal East, and later attacked the BJP and Congress offices in Jiribam town. Police reportedly opened fire to disperse the mob, resulting in one fatality.

Erosion of public trust: The violent attacks on political offices and leaders underscored deep public disillusionment with the state’s governance and leadership. The widespread violence has not only deepened the ethnic divide but also exposed the fragile state of law and order, leaving a trail of devastation and mistrust in its wake. The authorities face mounting challenges as they attempt to restore peace while addressing the grievances of the affected communities.

Manipur administration’s measures to address spiralling violence

In response to escalating violence in Manipur, the state administration has implemented stringent measures, including the suspension of mobile internet and data services across seven districts in the Imphal Valley, the imposition of curfews, and the re-enforcement of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) in six police station areas, including the violence-hit Jiribam, Manipur. To strengthen security, the central government deployed 20 additional companies of Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs)—comprising 15 from the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and five from the Border Security Force (BSF)—bringing an additional 7,000 personnel into the state.

The National Investigation Agency (NIA) has also taken up investigations into three key cases linked to the recent violence: the murder of a woman in Jiribam, the attack on a CRPF post, and the arson and killings in Borobekra. These steps aim to address the unrest, but significant challenges remain.

Civil society groups express scepticism: Despite these measures, civil society groups have raised concerns about the lack of a unified and effective approach to the crisis. Khuraijam Athouba, spokesperson for the Coordinating Committee on Manipur Integrity (COCOMI), a Meitei civil rights organisation, urged state representatives and MLAs to hold comprehensive discussions and take decisive action to resolve the ongoing conflict.

Divergent demands from the warring communities underscore the complexities of the crisis. While Meitei groups have called for the removal of AFSPA, Kuki groups have demanded the withdrawal of CRPF personnel from Kuki-dominated areas, reflecting the deepening rift over security arrangements.

Calls for leadership accountability: Prominent voices have called for accountability from the state government. Rights activist Irom Sharmila urged Chief Minister N. Biren Singh to take moral responsibility for the unrest and step down.

Political fallout- NPP withdraws support: The crisis has also led to political repercussions. The National People’s Party (NPP), the BJP’s second-largest ally in the state, formally withdrew its support for the government, accusing it of failing to restore law and order. In a letter to BJP President J.P. Nadda, NPP leader Conrad Sangma criticised the administration’s inability to resolve the crisis. However, the withdrawal does not pose an immediate threat to Chief Minister Biren Singh’s government, as the ruling NDA coalition holds a strong majority with 46 MLAs in the 60-member Manipur Legislative Assembly.

Curfews, internet bans and relaxation amid ongoing law and order concerns

Internet suspension extended: The Government of Manipur extended the suspension of mobile internet services in seven districts for an additional three days, citing the prevailing law and order situation. According to a state Home Department order issued on November 20, this decision aims to maintain communal harmony and prevent the spread of misinformation through social media platforms.

Initially imposed on November 16 for two days, the suspension was subsequently extended on November 18 and again on November 20. The affected districts include Imphal West, Imphal East, Bishnupur, Thoubal, Kakching, Kangpokpi, and Churachandpur. Commissioner (Home) N Ashok Kumar stated in the order that the extension would be effective from 5:15 PM on November 20 to 5:15 p.m. on November 23, with exemptions granted only in specific cases, such as government operations. Separately, internet services in Jiribam and Pherzawl districts were also suspended from 11:45 AM on November 19 for two days. However, exceptions were made for leased lines and fibre-to-the-home (FTTH) connections used by government offices or individuals with state-approved exemptions.

The suspension follows heightened tensions after the discovery of six bodies—three women and three children—who had been missing since an encounter on November 11, in which security forces killed ten armed militants. The recovery of the bodies sparked protests, prompting curfews and increased security measures.

Curfew relaxation announced for essential activities: In light of the ongoing curfew imposed in several districts, authorities announced a partial relaxation to allow residents to purchase essentials. The curfew, in effect across Imphal West, Imphal East, Bishnupur, Kakching, and Thoubal districts, was relaxed from 5:00 AM to 12:00 Noon on November 21. On the previous day, November 20, the curfew had been relaxed from 5:00 AM to 10:00 AM.

An order issued by K. Jadumani Singh, Additional District Magistrate of Imphal West, stated that the restriction of movement was temporarily lifted to facilitate the purchase of necessities, including food and medicines. The order also specified that no public gatherings, protests, or rallies would be permitted without prior approval.

Essential services such as healthcare, electricity, water supply, telecom, banking, and media were exempted from the curfew restrictions. Additionally, individuals traveling to and from the airport with valid permits and contractors/workers with airport entry permits were allowed to move freely beyond the relaxation hours.

District magistrates from Imphal East, Bishnupur, Kakching, and Thoubal issued similar directives, ensuring uniformity in the implementation of curfew relaxation across the affected areas.

Union government’s calculated response: The union government has faced consistent criticism for its callous approach to the Manipur crisis. Despite growing calls to either replace Chief Minister Biren Singh or impose President’s Rule, the Modi administration has refrained from taking decisive action. Analysts believe this reluctance stems from political considerations.

As a Meitei leader with considerable influence in the Imphal Valley, Biren Singh is pivotal to the BJP’s electoral strategy. Of the 60 assembly seats, 40 are concentrated in the Meitei-dominated Imphal Valley, making Singh’s leadership crucial for maintaining the BJP’s political base. His removal could destabilise the party’s standing in the region and further polarise the state’s fragile social fabric.

The imposition of President’s Rule is also seen as a politically risky move. In Manipur’s complex socio-political environment, such a step could be interpreted as overreach by New Delhi, potentially alienating local stakeholders. Moreover, it would signal an admission of governance failure, a narrative the Opposition would readily leverage on a national stage. Internationally, instability in Manipur, which borders sensitive regions like Myanmar and China, could have strategic ramifications. Any hasty decision by the Centre risks emboldening insurgent groups or inviting external interference.

A state in crisis: As the conflict in Manipur deepens, the state and central governments face mounting challenges in balancing security, governance, and public sentiment. The unrest has laid bare the complexities of managing ethnic tensions and the consequences of political inertia. While immediate measures like troop deployment and AFSPA enforcement have been implemented, long-term peace and stability will require inclusive dialogue and meaningful reconciliation between the deeply divided communities.

Kuki-Zo MLAs condemn “one-sided” resolutions by Manipur government

On 19 November, a group of 10 Kuki-Zo MLAs in Manipur issued a sharp critique of resolutions adopted during a meeting chaired by Chief Minister N. Biren Singh on 18 November. The meeting, attended by 26 National Democratic Alliance (NDA) MLAs, sought to address the recent violence in the state, including the November 11 Jiribam incident, where three women and three children from a Meitei family were abducted and killed. The Kuki-Zo MLAs accused the state government of exploiting the incident to suppress the tribal community and push a one-sided agenda.

Kuki-Zo MLAs: “Government exploiting tribal community”

The 10 MLAs, comprising seven from the BJP, one Independent, and two from the Kuki People’s Alliance, released a joint statement alleging that the state government has consistently acted against the interests of the tribal community.

“Time and again, the one-sided state government has taken undue advantage of the Jiribam incident in suppressing and curtailing the rights of the disadvantaged tribal community,” their statement read.

They criticised the government’s resolution to act decisively if certain demands were not implemented promptly, interpreting it as a veiled threat to the Central NDA government. The resolution had called for reviewing the exemption of AFSPA in six police station areas of the valley. The Kuki-Zo MLAs, however, countered this demand, asserting that AFSPA should be reimposed in all 13 police station areas of the Meitei-majority valley, which currently enjoy exemptions.

Demand for comprehensive mass operations: The BJP MLAs also criticised the state government’s demand for “mass operations” against Kuki militants, labelling it as biased and unfair.

“Mass operations must be conducted all over the state to recover all illegal arms from all militia groups,” the MLAs declared, calling for an impartial crackdown on armed elements across both hill and valley regions.

While the government sought to hand over three specific cases, including the Jiribam killings, to the National Investigation Agency (NIA), the Kuki-Zo legislators demanded a broader scope. They called for all cases of civilian killings in both the valley and the hills to be investigated by the NIA.

Call for balanced accountability: The MLAs criticised the selective labelling of Kuki militants as responsible for the killings, arguing that a fair process should be applied. They urged the government to precede any declarations with the designate on of Arambai Tenggol and Meitei Leepun as Unlawful Organisations under relevant laws. They further alleged that youth volunteers defending their villages against militant attacks were being unfairly targeted.

“Village volunteers are not an organisation, but youth defending their villages from murderous attacks by Arambai Tenggol, the so-called G5 (a conglomerate of five underground Meitei outfits) aided by the state police and, in the case of Jiribam, by the CRPF,” the statement read.

Appeal for peaceful dialogue and condemnation of mob attacks: The Kuki-Zo MLAs also highlighted the need for peaceful dialogue as the path forward, urging the government to prioritise negotiations over escalations. Additionally, they condemned the mob attacks on the homes of Meitei legislators, which occurred following public outrage over the November 11 incident.

The statement underscored the need for balanced governance, expressing concern over the deepening divide and calling on authorities to ensure justice for victims of violence, regardless of their community.

“It is imperative that the state moves towards reconciliation and equitable justice, avoiding actions that could further marginalise the tribal community,” the MLAs asserted.

The Kuki-Zo legislators’ response highlights the continuing ethnic and political tensions in Manipur, as communities and their representatives remain divided over issues of accountability, security, and governance. Their critique underscores the urgent need for inclusive and impartial measures to restore trust and peace in the state.

Congress calls for resignations of Home Minister Amit Shah and CM Biren Singh over Manipur violence

At a press conference held on 19 November 2024, the All India Congress Committee (AICC) in New Delhi demanded the resignation of Union Home Minister Amit Shah and Manipur Chief Minister N. Biren Singh. The party accused them of failing to control the ongoing violence in Manipur and called for immediate intervention by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

The press conference was led by Keisham Meghachandra, Congress’s Manipur president, along with Jairam Ramesh, the party’s general secretary in charge of communications, and Girish Chodankar, Congress’s Manipur in-charge.

Addressing the media, Keisham Meghachandra referenced Prime Minister Modi’s 2017 remark that leaders who cannot maintain peace in the state have “no right to govern Manipur.” Meghachandra questioned whether this principle applied to the current BJP-led “double-engine” government in Manipur, given the ongoing ethnic violence and governance failure.

Congress’s five-point charter of demands: During the press meet, Congress outlined a detailed five-point charter of demands aimed at addressing the crisis:

1. Prime Minister Modi must visit Manipur: Congress insisted that Modi visit Manipur before the winter parliamentary session, scheduled to begin on 25 November. The party urged Modi to engage with residents of relief camps, consult local leaders, and assess the ground situation.
2. Engagement with delegates from all parties: The Congress demanded that the Prime Minister meet delegations comprising representatives from all political parties, including the BJP and Congress, as homes of legislators from both sides have come under attack amidst the violence.
3. Appointment of a dedicated governor: Highlighting the absence of a permanent governor, Congress called for the appointment of a full-time governor for Manipur. The post has been held in additional charge by Assam Governor Laksman Acharya since July 2024, after the departure of former governor Anusuiya Uikey.
4. Accountability from HM Amit Shah and CM N. Biren Singh: The party criticised the alleged “jugalbandi” between HM Amit Shah and CM Biren Singh, accusing them of prioritising political survival over public welfare. The Congress further alleged favouritism and questioned the BJP government’s failure to address drug-related cases in the state.
5. Immediate action on Supreme Court concerns: The Congress demanded swift action on the Supreme Court’s observations about the state’s constitutional collapse. The apex court had previously flagged the breakdown of law and order in Manipur, which Congress claimed remains unaddressed.

BJP’s inaction under fire: Congress’s Manipur in-charge, Girish Chodankar, criticised the BJP for focusing on protecting Chief Minister Biren Singh instead of restoring stability in the state. “For the past 18 months, the Prime Minister has done nothing but protect the Chief Minister of Manipur,” Chodankar remarked as per India Today, accusing the BJP of neglecting the state’s welfare.

Chodankar reiterated the Congress’s commitment to restoring peace, asserting that “We have tried every possible way to bring stability, but this government has failed. The Prime Minister must respond immediately.”

Rising violence and administrative inaction: The ethnic conflict in Manipur, which began in May 2023, has intensified recently, with 20 deaths reported in November alone, according to some estimates. The violence is rooted in long-standing tensions between the Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities, which have led to physical segregation enforced by buffer zones patrolled by security forces.

Despite Home Minister Amit Shah’s earlier promise of compensation for victims’ families, the Congress criticised the Union Home Ministry for failing to disburse sufficient funds to cover the 226 lives lost, as per official figures.

Congress urges swift action: The Congress party concluded its press conference by demanding urgent measures to address the crisis and restore normalcy in Manipur. The party emphasised that failure to act decisively risks further destabilising the state, worsening the humanitarian crisis, and eroding public trust in governance.

Manipur CM issues notices to MLAs over absence at key meeting amid political turmoil

On November 18, 2024, the Manipur Chief Minister’s Secretariat issued notices to 11 MLAs, including ministers, for failing to attend a crucial meeting convened by Chief Minister N. Biren Singh. The meeting was called to address the worsening law-and-order situation in the state, which has been grappling with persistent ethnic violence.

Among those who did attend the meeting was Manipur’s Rajya Sabha member, Leishemba Sanajaoba, who has been aligned with the ruling BJP. However, seven Kuki-Zo MLAs from the BJP, who have been residing outside the Imphal Valley since the ethnic clashes began on 3 May 2023, were notably absent. This reflects the continuing ethnic divide and the reluctance of Kuki-Zo representatives to participate in valley-centric governance activities.

NPP legislators under scrutiny after party withdraws support: The list of MLAs served notices includes Sheikh Noorul Hassan of the National People’s Party (NPP), representing the Kshetrigao constituency. His absence follows the NPP’s formal withdrawal of support for the BJP-led government on 17 November 2024.

Meanwhile, the NPP has also issued show-cause notices to three of its seven MLAs who defied the party’s decision and attended the meeting. These MLAs are:

• Mayanglambam Rameswhar Singh (Kakching constituency)
• Thongam Shanti Singh (Moirang)
• Irengbam Nalini Devi (Oinam)

An NPP leader based in the Imphal Valley claimed that a signature purportedly belonging to the party’s Tamenglong MLA, Janghemlung Panmei, was forged to suggest his attendance at the meeting. The leader added that the NPP’s State Committee had informed its national president and Meghalaya Chief Minister, Conrad K. Sangma, about the breach, prompting the issuance of show-cause notices.

Most absentees belong to the BJP: Aside from Sheikh Noorul Hassan and Sapam Nishikanta Singh, an independent MLA representing Keishamthong, the remaining MLAs served notices are members of the BJP. Among them are:

• Khumukcham Joykisan (Thangmeiband)
• Md Achab Uddin (Jiribam), both of whom had previously defected from the Janata Dal (United).
• Two other NPP MLAs – N. Kayisii (Tadubi constituency) and Khuraijam Loken Singh (Wangoi) – were notably absent from the meeting but did not receive notices, unlike Mr. Hassan.

Political signals in low attendance: The meeting, attended by only 26 NDA MLAs apart from the Chief Minister, has sparked criticism and raised questions about the BJP’s standing in Manipur. The Manipur Assembly has 60 seats, and the BJP-led NDA coalition held 46 MLAs after the NPP’s withdrawal. However, attendance at the meeting revealed cracks within the ruling coalition.

Prominent Congress leader Jairam Ramesh commented on the development, posting on social media platform X:

“The Manipur Assembly has 60 MLAs. Last night, the CM of Manipur called a meeting in Imphal of all MLAs belonging to the NDA. Other than him, only 26 showed up. Of these 26, 4 belong to the NPP whose National President has already written to the BJP National President withdrawing support to the present CM.”

Ramesh suggested the low turnout was a clear indication of the BJP’s dwindling support in the state.

A fractured coalition amidst a state in crisis: The political situation in Manipur remains volatile, with the BJP-led government facing increasing challenges from within its coalition. The ethnic violence, coupled with growing dissatisfaction among allies and legislators, has left the government struggling to maintain cohesion. The absence of MLAs from critical meetings highlights the deep divisions within the ruling coalition, further exacerbating the challenges of governance in a state already wracked by communal tensions.

Former Manipur Governor questions PM Modi’s absence amid ongoing violence

Anusuiya Uikey, former Governor of Manipur, has expressed her surprise and disappointment over Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s failure to visit the violence-stricken state despite multiple appeals from civil society and her own repeated requests.

Speaking to ThePrint in an interview on 20 November 2024, Uikey emphasised the importance of restoring trust in the state, which has been plagued by ethnic violence between the majority Meitei community and the Kuki-Zo tribal population since May 2023.

Appeals to the Prime Minister ignored: Reflecting on her tenure, Uikey revealed that during her time as Governor, from February 2023 to July 2024, she regularly relayed the demands of the people to the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO). These included fervent calls for the Prime Minister to visit Manipur to address the escalating crisis.

“People of the state wanted the PM to visit, and they kept making requests, which I sent to the PMO. But I don’t know why he has not visited,” Uikey said, expressing her bewilderment at the lack of response. Her comments highlight a growing sentiment of alienation among Manipur’s population, who feel their concerns have been overlooked by the central leadership.

Renewed violence a setback to peace efforts: Uikey also shared her distress over the recent resurgence of violence in November 2024, following a brief lull in hostilities. She described the fresh outbreak as deeply disheartening, particularly given the fragile stability that had been achieved in the preceding months.

“Traditionally, Manipur has been a state of rich culture and art. It is a beautiful state, but the recent violence has disrupted the peace that was established. I am deeply shocked by the brutality of events, like the killing and burning of a Hmar woman in Jiribam district on 7 November, which is a stark reminder of the ongoing turmoil,” she said.

A call for trust-building and mutual peace: Uikey believes that the restoration of mutual trust between the two communities, facilitated by the central government, is the only path to lasting peace.

“The central government needs to take concrete steps to build confidence and mutual trust among the communities. Without this, enduring peace will remain elusive,” she asserted while speaking to The Print.Her tenure as governor during the conflict’s peak provided her with firsthand insight into the complexity of the crisis. Despite her efforts to mediate between communities and defuse tensions, the violence persisted, underscoring the deep-seated mistrust and ethnic divide.

An ‘international hand’ behind the conflict? Adding another layer to the discourse, Uikey suggested the possibility of an international influence exacerbating the conflict.
“There is an international hand behind the conflict, which is why the violence cannot be stopped despite the Centre’s efforts,” she alleged. While she refrained from elaborating on this claim, her comments suggest the presence of external actors who might be exploiting local tensions for geopolitical gains, particularly given Manipur’s strategic location near the borders with Myanmar and China.

A plea for peace amidst chaos: Amid growing calls for Chief Minister N. Biren Singh’s resignation over his handling of the crisis, Uikey defended his leadership. She implied that external factors, rather than Singh’s governance, were responsible for the prolonged unrest in the state.

“How it has unfolded, I don’t know, but I appeal to all people in Manipur to build confidence and mutual trust for enduring peace,” she said, reiterating the need for unity and reconciliation.

In her closing remarks, Uikey issued an earnest appeal to the people of Manipur to prioritise confidence-building and mutual understanding. She expressed hope that these efforts, combined with decisive action by the Centre, could pave the way for stability in the region.

The former governor’s candid reflections highlight the depth of the crisis in Manipur and the urgent need for both local and central leadership to take meaningful steps toward resolving the conflict and addressing the grievances of the affected communities.

Licypriya Kangujam claims censorship of Facebook account amidst activism

Licypriya Kangujam, a 13-year-old climate activist from Manipur, has alleged that her official Facebook account has been restricted in India following her outspoken comments on the recent abduction and killing of six Meitei women and children in Jiribam.

Taking to social media platform X (formerly Twitter) on Wednesday, Kangujam directly addressed Prime Minister Narendra Modi, accusing him of being fearful of her activism.

“Mr @narendramodi, scared of me? That’s why you work on his behest?” she questioned, insinuating that her account was restricted under the government’s directive as an attempt to suppress her voice.

Hello @Meta @facebook,
Why you restricted my official Facebook account? Mr @narendramodi scared of me that’s why you work on his behest? I didn’t violate any policy or community standards of Facebook. Kindly unrestricted it asap. Never ever think to attempt to silence my voice.… pic.twitter.com/Ex0l3Jmfs9

— Licypriya Kangujam (@LicypriyaK) November 20, 2024

You mess with a wrong guy!

Unrestrict my Facebook Account immediately! Sharing a screenshot of a news published in Indian Express is not a crime. pic.twitter.com/HNkrR0eDpp

— Licypriya Kangujam (@LicypriyaK) November 20, 2024

Criticism of Meta and claims of injustice: Kangujam did not mince words in her criticism of Meta, Facebook’s parent company, for what she described as an unjust action. She shared a notification from Facebook explaining that her profile had been restricted within India under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, which permits the government to block access to digital content deemed harmful to public order or national security.

“I didn’t violate any policy or community standards of Facebook,” she wrote in her post. “Kindly unrestrict it ASAP. Never ever think to attempt to silence my voice,” she added, emphasising her commitment to continuing her activism despite attempts to suppress her.

The teenager’s frustration was evident as she accused the authorities and Meta of targeting her for speaking out about the tragic Jiribam killings.

Activism and alleged silencing: Kangujam has been vocal about the ongoing ethnic violence in Manipur, which has sharply divided the state along communal lines. Her comments on the Jiribam incident—in which six individuals from the Meitei community were abducted and killed—have brought renewed attention to the issue. Her social media activism has often placed her at the forefront of raising awareness about human rights and environmental issues in the region. However, her outspokenness has also made her a target for criticism and, now, alleged censorship.

Government’s use of Section 69A of the IT Act: The restriction of Kangujam’s Facebook account under Section 69A of the IT Act has sparked questions about the application of this provision. While the government can use this law to block digital content that it considers a threat to national security, public order, or sovereignty, critics argue that it is sometimes employed to stifle dissent and suppress voices critical of the administration. Kangujam’s case has reignited debates about the balance between maintaining public order and safeguarding freedom of expression in a democracy.

A voice for change: Despite the challenges, Kangujam remains resolute in her activism. Her stance reflects the resilience of a young generation unafraid to confront authority and raise awareness about critical social and environmental issues. The incident underscores the growing role of digital platforms in enabling activism while also highlighting the risks of censorship and the contentious intersection of government policies with online freedoms. As Kangujam’s allegations gain traction, they add another layer to the already complex and volatile situation in Manipur.

No end in sight: Manipur’s spiralling crisis deepens

‘Coffin Rally’ announced by Kuki organisations: Manipur’s volatile situation shows no signs of abating, with Kuki organisations planning a ‘coffin rally’ in Churachandpur on Tuesday, November 21, to commemorate 10 Kuki-Zo youths allegedly killed in a gunfight with security forces in Jiribam district on November 11.

The rally, organised by the Zomi Students’ Federation (ZSF), Kuki Students’ Organisation (KSO), and Hmar Students’ Association (HSA), calls on schools and colleges to send students from Class 10 onwards, clad in black shirts, to participate in the procession. A notice issued by the groups on Monday stated that 10 symbolic coffins would be carried during the rally to honour the deceased. The actual bodies remain in the mortuary of a local hospital.

The bodies, initially sent to Assam’s Silchar for postmortems, arrived in Churachandpur—a Kuki-majority district—on Saturday afternoon. However, the Indigenous Tribal Leaders’ Forum (ITLF), a prominent Kuki-Zo organisation, announced on Sunday that the funerals would be delayed until the families receive postmortem reports.

Allegations against security forces: Manipur Police have reported that the deceased were suspected militants killed in an encounter with security forces. The alleged insurgents, dressed in camouflage gear and wielding sophisticated weapons, reportedly attacked the Borobekra Police Station and a nearby CRPF camp in Jakuradhor, Jiribam district, on November 11. The attack included the abduction of six civilians, comprising three women and three children, according to police accounts.

The incident has drawn criticism over the handling of the situation by security forces. The CRPF, tasked with restoring peace in the region, has faced allegations of bias and inaction from both sides of the conflict. Meitei organisations claim that the previously deployed Assam Rifles were too lenient with Kuki militants, while Kuki groups have expressed distrust in the CRPF’s ability to safeguard their communities.

Growing discontent with central leadership: Adding to the frustration is Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s absence from Manipur, despite 16 months of continuous ethnic violence. Civil society and opposition groups have repeatedly urged the Prime Minister to visit the state, but he has remained silent on the crisis. Similarly, Union Home Minister Amit Shah has faced criticism for failing to take decisive action, especially as over 6,500 firearms and thousands of rounds of ammunition have been looted, with disarmament efforts remaining insufficient.

Polarised demands and escalating divisions: The ethnic conflict has polarised the demands of the Meitei and Kuki communities. Meitei organisations like the Coordinating Committee on Manipur Integrity (COCOMI) have called for immediate military action against Kuki militants, along with the repeal of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), which they argue has exacerbated the conflict. In contrast, Kuki groups continue to push for a separate administration, asserting that coexistence with the Meitei majority is no longer feasible.

Critics have pointed to a broader political conspiracy behind the violence. Some Meitei groups link the escalation to remarks made by Mizoram Chief Minister Lalduhoma in the United States. Lalduhoma advocated for a “Christian nation” uniting Kuki-Zo populations across India, Myanmar, and Bangladesh. Meitei leaders argue that such declarations have emboldened cross-border Kuki groups to seize land, allegedly to further the goal of a larger Kuki-dominated region.

Security forces under scrutiny: The role of security forces remains contentious, with both communities accusing them of partiality. Meitei groups distrust the Assam Rifles, while Kuki organisations criticise the CRPF’s ability to protect their interests. This breakdown in faith towards security agencies has left many civilians vulnerable, exacerbating the crisis in a state where law and order appears non-existent.

A humanitarian crisis without resolution: As the violence continues, the human toll mounts. The state remains deeply fractured, with buffer zones patrolled by security forces separating Kuki and Meitei areas. Amidst the chaos, the fundamental need for restoration of trust between communities and decisive action from the central government has never been more urgent. The ‘coffin rally’ symbolises not just the grief of the Kuki community but also the enduring wounds of a conflict that shows no signs of resolution. Without meaningful intervention, the cycle of violence in Manipur risks deepening an already tragic humanitarian crisis.

Manipur Tribal MLAs plan joint protest in Delhi, demand CM’s removal and separate administration

Unified protest by tribal legislators: In a significant development, ten tribal legislators from Manipur, including seven from the ruling BJP and three Independents, have announced plans for a joint protest in Delhi during the first week of December. Their primary demands include the removal of CM N. Biren Singh and the establishment of a separate administration for tribal communities. This will mark the first time these MLAs, who have previously raised these demands individually, are uniting on a common platform.

The decision to hold the protest at Jantar Mantar was finalised during a meeting in Churachandpur involving three of the ten MLAs, representatives of Civil Society Organisations (CSOs), and members from 25 Kuki groups that have signed the Suspension of Operation (SoO) agreement.

One of the legislators, speaking on condition of anonymity with The Wire, said, “We have previously written or spoken about the need for the Chief Minister’s removal and other issues, but the recent events have compelled us to come together and present a unified voice.”

Route to Delhi- circumventing Imphal: Security concerns have forced most of the MLAs to avoid Imphal, the Meitei-majority state capital. Instead, they will travel to Aizawl before flying to Delhi. This reluctance stems from perceived threats in Imphal, despite the state government’s assurances of their safety. These MLAs, who represent tribal constituencies, have not attended any assembly sessions or recent government meetings, including a key one held by CM Biren Singh earlier this week.

Renewed ethnic clashes worsen crisis: Manipur has been embroiled in ethnic violence for nearly 18 months, with over 240 people killed and tens of thousands displaced. The state is deeply divided along ethnic lines, with Meiteis predominantly in the plains of the Imphal Valley and Kuki-Zo communities concentrated in the hills. Despite deploying additional troops and reimposing the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) in conflict-hit areas, the Centre has struggled to contain the escalating tensions.

Suspension of operation agreement- a contentious issue: Representatives of the SoO groups—comprising 25 Kuki militant organisations—also participated in the Churachandpur meeting. The SoO agreement, a tripartite pact signed in 2008 between the Centre, the Manipur government, and Kuki militant groups, has been annually renewed to maintain peace. However, the agreement expired earlier this year, leaving its future uncertain.

In February, the Manipur Assembly unanimously passed a resolution urging the Centre to abrogate the agreement, accusing militant groups of violating its terms. The CM has since demanded its termination, while tribal groups argue for its continuation as a safeguard for their communities. Although the SoO representatives will not participate in the Delhi protest, their presence at preparatory meetings underscores their vested interest in the ongoing conflict and its resolution.

Protest agenda- amplifying tribal voices: The tribal MLAs plan to present a detailed account of the October 15 meeting between 15 state legislators from Meitei, Kuki-Zo-Hmar, and Naga communities and central government representatives. This meeting, convened by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), was an attempt to broker peace.

The MLAs have been advised to clarify their stance on critical issues, including their demands for a separate administration, the ongoing ethnic strife, and the central government’s role in facilitating dialogue. Additionally, they are expected to share updates with their constituencies if the MHA initiates another round of talks.

A political and humanitarian impasse: Manipur’s society remains fractured, with communities retreating into ethnic strongholds. Meiteis dominate the Imphal Valley, while the Kukis control the surrounding hills. This geographic and ethnic segregation has only worsened amid escalating violence and reprisal attacks.

The planned protest highlights not only the discontent within the tribal community but also the failure of administrative and political mechanisms to address the root causes of the conflict. The unified front of the ten MLAs signals a turning point in their strategy to press for political and administrative changes, potentially increasing pressure on the central government to intervene decisively in Manipur’s prolonged crisis.

Without effective dialogue and resolution, the state risks further descent into instability, with ethnic hostilities threatening to undermine Manipur’s social fabric.

Related:

Fresh violence grips Manipur: Clashes in Jiribam and widespread protests after rape and brutal killings

“Leaked Intelligence report” on alleged Kuki militants entering Manipur from Myanmar sparks panic, later retracted by authorities

Manipur plunges into deeper turmoil amid fresh violence and drone attacks since early September

Manipur on Edge: Violent Clashes Erupt on the day following Kuki-Zo Protests Demanding Separate Administration, action against state CM based on leaked tapes

The post Divided & strife-torn Manipur: intensified violence, abdication by state & union governments, demands of accountability from BJP MLAs appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Details of the present pleas before the Bench:

The judgment emerged from a batch of writ petitions filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, wherein various individuals sought relief against the summary demolition of their properties. The Supreme Court was hearing two urgent applications, moved by the victims of these targeted petitions, along with separate pleas filed by Jamiat and CPI (M) leader Brinda Karat, challenging recent demolition actions by authorities in the states of Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan. These pleas have been moved by the victims, Rashid Khan from Rajasthan and Mohammad Hussain from Madhya Pradesh, whose homes were targeted.

One of the applications was filed by the Rashid Khan, a 60-years old auto-rickshaw driver from Udaipur. In Udaipur the District Administration demolished the house of Rashid as one of his tenant’s boy, allegedly stabbed his classmate. An order was issued by the district forest authority and Municipal Corporation on Friday, August 16, 2024 and gave the family time till Tuesday i.e. August 20 to vacate their home, but the authorities demolished the house a little later on August 17.

The other plea was filed by Mohammad Hussain from Madhya Pradesh who has also alleged that his house and shop were unlawfully bulldozed by the state administration. Both Khan and Hussain’s applications were filed in the context of a case previously submitted by Jamiat Ulama I Hind, which objected to the demolition of Muslim homes in Haryana’s Nuh following communal violence between Hindus and Muslims.

Observations by the Court

The Supreme Court’s judgment provides a detailed analysis of several foundational principles and addresses each issue comprehensively:

1. Upholding the rule of law: The Supreme Court underscored that the rule of law is a fundamental tenet of the constitutional framework and must guide all state actions. Referencing A.V. Dicey, the Court emphasised that the rule of law requires that every individual is subject to the same laws and that state actions should always align with legal principles. Any actions taken outside of these laws are arbitrary and undermine democracy. In the demolition cases, the Court highlighted that state authorities appeared to have bypassed legal frameworks, breaching the rule of law.

“There can be no doubt with the principle that, no one is above the law of the land; that everybody is equal before the law.” (Para 15)

2. Principle of separation of powers: The Court emphasised the importance of the separation of powers, stating that while the executive has broad administrative authority, punitive actions with serious consequences fall under the judiciary’s exclusive purview. The judgment argued that punitive measures without judicial oversight infringe upon judicial authority and weaken the justice system. By acting as both accuser and judge, the executive undermined legal safeguards designed to protect individuals from arbitrary punishment.

“If the executive in an arbitrary manner demolishes the houses of citizens only on the ground that they are accused of a crime, then it acts contrary to the principles of ‘rule of law’. If the executive acts as a judge and inflicts penalty of demolition on a citizen on the ground that he is an accused, it violates the principle of ‘separation of powers’. We are of the view that in such matters the public officials, who take the law in their hands, should be made accountable for such high-handed actions.” (Para 53)

3. Presumption of innocence: The Court reiterated that the presumption of innocence is central to criminal justice and must not be disregarded for expediency. Citing landmark cases, the Court underscored that imposing punishment prior to judicial determination contradicts principles of fairness and justice. It acknowledged that while demolitions might deter unlawful behaviour, they cannot substitute for due process and judicial oversight.

“The principle, that “an accused is not guilty unless proven so in a court of law” is foundational to any legal system. It reflects the presumption of innocence, which means that every person accused of a crime is considered innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by a court of law. This principle ensures that individuals are not unfairly punished or stigmatized based solely on accusations or suspicions.” (Para 63)

4. Right to shelter: The Court held that the right to shelter is fundamental and integral to human dignity, protected under Article 21. The judgment noted that arbitrary demolition of one’s home severely infringes on the right to life. Drawing from international human rights conventions, the Court argued that shelter provides physical and psychological security essential for a stable life, emphasising that arbitrary actions against shelter are unconstitutional.

“The right to shelter is one of the facets of Article 21. Depriving such innocent people of their right to life by removing shelter from their heads, in our considered view, would be wholly unconstitutional.” (Para 78)

“Punishing such persons who have no connection with the crime by demolishing the house where they live in or properties owned by them is nothing but an anarchy and would amount to a violation of the right to life guaranteed under the Constitution.” (Para 76)

5. Public accountability and trust: Referring to the doctrine of public trust, the Court stated that state officials are entrusted by the public and must conduct actions transparently, with accountability for abuses of power. It found that demolitions without legal grounds breached public trust, requiring accountability measures. Officials responsible for such demolitions were deemed to have acted in bad faith, warranting punitive consequences.

“This Court held that the well-established precepts of public trust and public accountability are fully applicable to the functions which emerge from the public servants or even the persons holding public office. It has been held that the doctrine of “full faith and credit” applies to the acts done by the officers in the hierarchy of the State. They have to faithfully discharge their duties to elongate public purpose.” (Para 47)

6. Potential abuse of power in demolitions: The Supreme Court critical assessed the arbitrary demolition of properties belonging to accused individuals, describing such actions as a potential “abuse of power” that contradicts constitutional principles. Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan observed that selective demolition, where certain structures were demolished while others remained untouched, suggested state malice.

“…when a particular structure is chosen all of a sudden for demolition and the rest of the similarly situated structures in the same vicinity are not even being touched, mala fide may loom large. In such cases, where the authorities indulge into arbitrary pick and choose of the structures and it is established that soon before initiation of such an action an occupant of the structure was found to be involved in a criminal case, a presumption could be drawn that the real motive for such demolition proceedings was not the illegal structure but an action of penalizing the accused without even trying him before the court of law. No doubt, such a presumption could be rebuttable. The authorities will have to satisfy the court that it did not intend to penalize a person accused by demolishing the structure.” (Para 82) 

7. Limits of executive authority: The judgment asserted that the executive cannot bypass judicial processes to punish an accused by demolishing property, as this oversteps executive powers and undermines the rule of law. The Court described these arbitrary demolitions as “high-handed” and deemed demolitions without the authorities following the basic principles of natural justice and acting without due process to be a “chilling sight”.

“The chilling sight of a bulldozer demolishing a building, when authorities have failed to follow the basic principles of natural justice and have acted without adhering to the principle of due process, reminds one of a lawless state of affairs, where “might was right”. In our constitution, which rests on the foundation of ‘the rule of law’, such high-handed and arbitrary actions have no place. Such excesses at the hands of the executive will have to be dealt with the heavy hand of the law. Our constitutional ethos and values would not permit any such abuse of power and such misadventures cannot be tolerated by the court of law.” (Para 72)

8. Due process for the accused and convicted: The Court underscored that due process is essential not only for those accused of crimes but also for individuals who have been convicted. It highlighted that, even in cases of conviction, property cannot be demolished without following the procedures established by law. The Court further stressed that any executive action assuming guilt and enacting punishment, like demolition, without a fair trial, infringes on the principle of separation of powers.

“As we have already said, such an action also cannot be done in respect of a person who is convicted of an offence. Even in the case of such a person the property/properties cannot be demolished without following the due process as prescribed by law. 74. Such an action by the executive would be wholly arbitrary and would amount to an abuse of process of law. The executive in such a case would be guilty of taking the law in his hand and giving a go-bye to the principle of the rule of law.” (Para 73 and 74)

9. Rights of the accused: The judgment stated that individuals accused of crimes are entitled to fundamental constitutional protections, such as the right to a fair trial, the right to dignity, and protection from cruel or inhumane treatment. The Court affirmed that both accused and convicted individuals have specific rights enshrined in constitutional and criminal law, which the state must respect. It further stressed that arbitrary or excessive actions against accused persons or convicts are impermissible without adhering to lawful procedures. The Court called for institutional accountability in cases where an accused person’s rights are compromised due to state overreach, reinforcing the foundational legal principle of presumed innocence until proven guilty.

“It is to be noted that even in the cases consisting of imposition of a death sentence, it is always a discretion available 74 to the courts as to whether to award such an extreme punishment or not. There is even an institutional safeguard in the cases of such punishment to the effect that the decision of the trial court inflicting death penalty cannot be executed unless it is confirmed by the High Court. Even in the cases of convicts for the commission of most extreme and heinous offences, the punishment cannot be imposed without following the mandatory requirements under the statute. In that light, can it be said that a person who is only accused of committing some crime or even convicted can be inflicted the punishment of demolition of his property/properties? The answer is an emphatic ‘No’.” (Para 75)

10. Accountability for public officials in arbitrary demolitions: The Court emphasised that public officials involved in carrying out such demolitions must be held accountable for their actions. It stressed that those who act beyond the law in such an arbitrary and forceful manner should be made responsible for their actions, underscoring the importance of restitution in such cases.

“We are of the view that in such matters the public officials, who take the law in their hands, should be made accountable for such high-handed actions. 54. For the executive to act in a transparent manner so as to avoid the vice of arbitrariness, we are of the view that certain binding directives need to be formulated. This will ensure that public officials do not act in a high-handed, arbitrary, and discriminatory manner. Further, if they indulge in such acts, accountability must be fastened upon them.” (Para 53 and 54)

11. Reinforcing Constitutional ethos: In summary, the Court highlighted that executive authorities are not permitted to bypass judicial processes or assume judicial functions by deciding guilt and administering punishment. The Court emphasised that determining guilt is the exclusive domain of the judiciary. This judgment reinforces India’s commitment to the rule of law, ensuring that executive actions, regardless of the seriousness of the accusations, adhere to constitutional limits and uphold procedural justice.

“It is a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence as recognized in our country that a person is presumed to be innocent till he is held guilty. In our view, if demolition of a house is permitted wherein number of persons of a family or a few families reside only on the ground that one person residing in such a house is either an accused or convicted in the crime, it will amount to inflicting a collective punishment on the entire family or the families residing in such structure. In our considered view, our constitutional scheme and the criminal jurisprudence would never permit the same.” (Para 88)

Power of Article 142

To prevent arbitrary demolitions, the Court exercised its authority under Article 142 of the Indian Constitution, establishing guidelines to curb “bulldozer actions” as punitive measures against those accused or convicted of crimes. It mandated that individuals facing demolition should be granted time to contest the orders, ensuring they have a fair chance to challenge the demolition in an appropriate forum. The Court also advised that authorities should delay action, especially when vulnerable groups—such as women, children, and elderly persons—are required to vacate, suggesting that a brief postponement would not compromise the state’s interests.

“In order to allay the fears in the minds of the citizens with regard to arbitrary exercise of power by the officers/officials of the State, we find it necessary to issue certain directions in exercise of our power under Article 142 of the Constitution. We are also of the view that even after orders of demolition are passed, the affected party needs to be given some time so as to challenge the order of demolition before an appropriate forum. We are further of the view that even in cases of persons who do not wish to contest the demolition order, sufficient time needs to 87 be given to them to vacate and arrange their affairs. It is not a happy sight to see women, children and aged persons dragged to the streets overnight. Heavens would not fall on the authorities if they hold their hands for some period.” (Para 90)

The Court specified that these protections do not apply to unauthorised structures in public spaces, including roads, footpaths, railway tracks, or areas near water bodies, nor to demolitions ordered by a court. This exception aims to balance individual rights with the need to prevent unauthorised occupation of public spaces.

Directions issued by the Court

The court issued comprehensive guidelines to prevent arbitrary demolitions and to reinforce procedural fairness by establishing the following:

1. Time to challenge demolition orders: After a demolition order is issued, the affected individuals must be allowed sufficient time to contest the order before the appropriate forum.
2. Time for voluntary vacating: Even for those who do not intend to challenge the demolition, adequate time should be provided to vacate the premises.
3. Mandatory show-cause notice: No demolition should occur without a prior show-cause notice, served either within the time specified by local municipal laws or within 15 days of service, whichever is later.
4. Notice delivery and documentation: Notices must be sent by registered mail to the property owner and posted visibly on the property. A digital notification should also be sent to the office of the Collector or District Magistrate, which must acknowledge receipt to ensure transparency.
5. Designation of nodal officer: District Magistrates should designate a nodal officer and assign an official email for demolition communications within one month.
6. Detailed notice content: The notice should outline the nature of the unauthorised construction, specific violations, demolition grounds, personal hearing dates, and the authority handling the matter.
7. Digital portal requirement: Municipal authorities must set up a digital portal within three months where details about notices, responses, show-cause orders, and final decisions are accessible.
8. Opportunity for personal hearing: The designated authority must allow a personal hearing for the affected party, recording the hearing minutes and providing a reasoned final order. This order should address the party’s arguments, the authority’s findings, and whether partial or full demolition is justified.
9. Judicial review: If an appeal mechanism exists, the demolition order must be on hold for 15 days from receipt to allow the owner a chance to appeal. The order should also be posted on the digital portal.
10. Opportunity for voluntary removal: The property owner should be given the chance to remove unauthorised construction voluntarily within the 15-day period. If they do not comply, and no stay is granted by an appellate authority, demolition may proceed.
11. Limit to non-compoundable structures: Only parts of the structure that are non-compoundable under local laws may be demolished.
12. Inspection and videographic documentation: Before demolition, the authority must prepare an inspection report, videograph the process, and preserve records. The final report, including a list of personnel involved, must be submitted to the Municipal Commissioner and uploaded to the digital portal.
13. Contempt and accountability: Any breach of these guidelines may lead to contempt proceedings and prosecution. If demolitions violate Court orders, responsible officers may be liable for restoring the property at personal cost, including payment of damages.
14. Dissemination of judgment: The judgment was ordered to be distributed to Chief Secretaries of all States and UTs and Registrar Generals of High Courts. States must circulate guidance on the ruling to relevant authorities.

Petitioners’ contentions

The petitions collectively contended that state authorities were engaging in a disturbing pattern of demolishing homes and businesses of individuals accused in criminal cases without following due process of law. This trend, referred to colloquially as “bulldozer justice,” involved allegations that these demolitions were targeted actions against certain communities and political dissenters, carried out in the absence of formal judicial determinations of guilt or proper legal protocols.

The petitioners pointed out specific instances in states like Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, where several demolitions had taken place following allegations of involvement in criminal activities or political protests. In such cases, state machinery reportedly moved swiftly to demolish the homes of accused individuals, often with little to no prior notice, minimal opportunity for appeals, and a lack of legal proceedings establishing their guilt. These actions, according to the petitioners, not only violated the fundamental rights to shelter, equality, and due process but also reflected a breakdown of the rule of law in favour of executive overreach.

The court’s task was therefore to examine whether these demolition actions were legally defensible or whether they constituted a misuse of state power in breach of constitutional protections. The case brought into focus several interwoven principles: the rule of law, separation of powers, and the fundamental rights of individuals, including the right to property and shelter.

Central issues highlighted in the case

The judgment identifies and dissects several key issues that had been brought up by the petitioners:

1. Violation of due process of law: The petitions emphasised that the demolitions were conducted without procedural fairness, including notice and the opportunity for a hearing, which are foundational to the principle of natural justice. This issue questioned whether the state could deprive individuals of property without any formal adjudication or adherence to legal procedures.
2. Presumption of innocence: The petitions highlighted a troubling presumption of guilt that appeared inherent in the state’s actions, with demolitions proceeding on the basis of allegations or accusations being raised by the state police against the targeted individuals alone. This aspect raised concerns over the use of administrative powers to punish individuals in lieu of judicially sanctioned penalties, undermining the accused’s right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
3. Arbitrariness and erosion of rule of law: The judgment had to consider whether these demolitions represented a breach of the rule of law. The principle of rule of law, foundational to a democratic society, requires that all state actions be predictable, transparent, and consistent. Arbitrary demolitions carried out without proper legal authorisation or transparent procedures brought into question the very fabric of rule-based governance.
4. Separation of powers: The case addressed the overstepping of executive powers into areas traditionally reserved for the judiciary. Punitive actions, such as passing convictions and sentencing the demolition of property, typically fall under the jurisdiction of the judiciary, ensuring a fair trial and proportional punishment. The court’s role was to determine if the executive had bypassed the judiciary’s role by unilaterally deciding to punish individuals outside of the formal legal system.
5. Accountability and public trust: The principle of accountability emerged as a critical concern, examining whether state officials could be held accountable for demolitions conducted in violation of legal procedures. The doctrine of public trust mandates that public officials exercise power as custodians of the people’s trust, acting transparently and responsibly.

Arguments raised by the parties

Submissions made by the petitioners: The petitioners had argued that the demolitions were in clear violation of constitutional rights and represented an abuse of state power. They asserted the following:

• Lack of adherence to due process: The demolitions were carried out without prior notice or an opportunity for the accused to present their case. This disregard for procedural safeguards contravened the constitutional mandate of Article 21, which protects the right to life and personal liberty. By bypassing established procedures, the state not only deprived the accused of their property but also of their dignity and sense of security.
• Punitive in nature: The petitioners contended that the demolitions were punitive measures disguised as administrative actions. They argued that demolishing homes of those accused of crimes, without any judicial pronouncement of guilt, amounted to a pre-emptive punishment that violated the principle of presumption of innocence. This, they argued, created a dangerous precedent where the executive assumed the role of judge, jury, and executioner.
• Infringement of fundamental rights: The right to shelter, enshrined as a fundamental right, was argued to be inalienable and non-derogable. The petitioners highlighted that the Constitution protects individuals from state actions that threaten basic human needs, such as a home. They pointed to the jurisprudence that recognises shelter as integral to human dignity and a necessary condition for the exercise of other rights.
• Discriminatory and arbitrary actions: The petitioners argued that the demolitions were disproportionately aimed at certain communities and individuals, indicating a selective and discriminatory application of administrative power. This arbitrary use of state machinery not only undermined the rule of law but also created a perception of bias and prejudice in state actions.

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, senior advocate M.R. Shamshad, senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, senior advocate C.U. Singh, senior advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan, advocate Prashant Bhushan, advocate Mohd. Nizammudin Pasha, advocate Fauzia Shakil and advocate Rashmi Singh had appeared for the petitioners/applicants.

Submissions made by the respondents:

The state governments and the Union of India, represented by the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, defended the demolitions on several grounds, such as:

• Lawfulness of demolitions: The respondents argued that all demolitions were conducted in accordance with municipal laws and regulations that allow for the removal of unauthorised constructions. They contended that these actions were administrative in nature and were necessary for enforcing urban planning and public order. Demolitions, they argued, were within the executive’s purview and did not require judicial sanction in cases of unauthorised structures.
• Protection of public order: The respondents maintained that the demolitions were legitimate actions to maintain public order and enforce laws regarding land use and property management. They argued that individuals accused of crimes often built or occupied unauthorised structures, and removing these structures was part of a broader strategy to uphold lawful land use.
• Statutory authority and exceptions: The respondents cited specific provisions under municipal laws that permitted immediate demolitions without notice in cases of unauthorised encroachments on public land, roads, or water bodies. They argued that under such statutes, the state had a statutory mandate to act swiftly in the removal of unlawful structures to prevent public nuisances and ensure public safety.

Reaffirming the rule of law: A landmark judgment safeguarding fundamental rights, human rights and judicial oversight

This judgment firmly establishes that no citizen in India can be deprived of their property or shelter without lawful process and judicial oversight, underscoring the commitment to constitutional principles that protect individual rights against overreach. The ruling reinforces democratic safeguards by placing stringent checks on executive powers, mandating that actions affecting private property and shelter must follow clear procedural protections. In doing so, it highlights the judiciary’s role as a defender of individual rights, ensuring that the state cannot exercise arbitrary authority that undermines citizens’ trust in the rule of law. This foundational stance is a crucial reminder that state power, while necessary, must operate within the bounds of fairness and legal accountability.

At the heart of the judgment is a reaffirmation of the rule of law, emphasising that democratic governance must adhere to principles of justice and non-selective enforcement of laws. It reinforces that no arm of the state, including the executive, can bypass established legal processes to impose punishment, a critical safeguard against abuse of power. By reiterating that punitive actions, such as demolitions, cannot be decided or enacted by the executive without judicial endorsement, the judgment underlines the importance of a system that values transparency, fairness, and predictability in state actions. This ruling is timely in a period of increasing concern over unchecked executive power and serves to uphold the idea that the judiciary is the sole authority on matters of guilt and punishment.

The judgment also extends robust protections to fundamental rights, especially those of vulnerable communities who are often at risk of unjust state actions. In recognising the right to shelter as an extension of the right to life and dignity, it underscores the societal importance of a stable home, affirming that housing is more than mere property—it is security, identity, and foundation. The ruling’s procedural safeguards and accountability measures are particularly impactful for marginalised communities, who are disproportionately affected by evictions and demolitions. These protections are crucial in a landscape where informal housing is common and where rapid state actions can push vulnerable populations into severe socio-economic hardship. The judgment, therefore, reinforces the judiciary’s role as a champion of inclusive protection, ensuring that all citizens, regardless of socio-economic status, are shielded from arbitrary actions.

The judgment’s emphasis on accountability and transparency is another key takeaway, introducing procedural requirements that mandate prior notice, digital records, and opportunities for affected individuals to respond before any state-led demolition. This push for transparency, with directives for a public digital portal to document each demolition, is a step toward increased public oversight, which in turn builds citizens’ confidence in government processes. The emphasis on personal accountability, where officials can face consequences for violations, serves as a significant deterrent to potential abuses of power. By setting these standards, the judgment promotes responsible governance that aligns with democratic principles, ensuring that public officials act as guardians of, rather than threats to, citizens’ rights.

Ultimately, this ruling is a powerful legacy for Indian governance and the judiciary’s role as a custodian of democracy and civil liberties. It sends a message both domestically and internationally that India’s democratic system, rooted in respect for human rights and the rule of law, stands firm against authoritarian tendencies. As a landmark decision, it will likely be a touchstone for future cases involving executive overreach, setting a precedent that demands due process, accountability, and judicial oversight as essential elements of governance. This judgment is not just a procedural mandate; it is a robust assertion of democratic values, a testament to the judiciary’s responsibility in upholding the Constitution, and a commitment to safeguarding citizens from the misuse of state power.

The complete judgment may be read below.

(Details of the previous orders can be read here, here and here.)

Related:

Demolitions: SC orders status quo on Sonapur demolitions, issues notice to Assam Government Uttarakhand, UP, Gujarat also ignore Sept 17 order

Supreme Court halts nationwide demolitions through interim order, emphasising the ethos of the Constitution

Supreme Court rebukes “Bulldozer Justice,” plans to issue nationwide guidelines to prevent arbitrary demolitions

Supreme Court to hear urgent pleas against state-sanctioned bulldozer demolitions in Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan

The post Supreme Court reinforces due process in demolition cases, lays down stringent guidelines to prevent arbitrary demolitions appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Since November 7, Manipur has witnessed a series of deeply disturbing violent events, heightening ethnic tensions and plunging the region into further unrest. The recent murder of Zosangkim Hmar, a 38-year-old Hmar tribal woman, has left a traumatic imprint on the community. Attacked in her own village in Jiribam district, Zosangkim reportedly endured horrific violence—including being shot, raped, and burned alive by alleged members of the extremist Arambai Tenggoll group. Her brutal death has fuelled intense protests across the state, especially among Kuki-Zo women, who gathered en masse to demand justice and condemn what they view as insufficient action by the authorities. Meanwhile, just days later, another woman was shot dead while working in the fields in Bishnupur district, adding to the growing concerns over safety in conflict-prone rural areas.

In response, security forces have heightened operations in affected areas, leading to an exchange of gunfire with alleged militants, leaving 11 dead and injuring CRPF personnel. While the police are justifying their action under the guise of killing militants, the Kuki community is alleging that they were just volunteers. The violence has not only brought attention to the dire need for more protective measures but has also intensified calls for autonomy from the Kuki-Zo community, who feel systemically neglected and vulnerable. Amid the escalating conflict, over 60,000 displaced residents, including thousands of children, struggle to find stability and security in relief camps, where mental health concerns and substance abuse among youth are rising. Manipur’s prolonged ethnic strife has now reached a critical juncture, with affected communities calling for sustained governmental intervention to curb violence, protect lives, and ensure justice for victims.

Violent rape and murder of Hmar tribal woman sparks outrage

The brutal rape and murder of 38-year-old Hmar tribal woman, Zosangkim, has sent shockwaves through Manipur’s Jiribam district, intensifying the already volatile ethnic tensions in the region. Zosangkim, a mother of three, was attacked on November 7, allegedly by members of the extremist Meitei group Arambai Tenggoll. Reports from the Indigenous Tribal Advocacy Committee (ITAC) suggest that the attackers, armed with sophisticated weaponry, began firing indiscriminately at the villagers of Zairawn. As the villagers fled to nearby forests for safety, Zosangkim, unable to escape due to being shot in the leg, was left behind and subjected to a horrific ordeal. According to ITAC, she was raped and then burned alive in her own home. The gruesome nature of the attack has sparked outrage and calls for justice across the state. It is also essential to note that the attackers had also set fire to 10 houses in the village, further displacing families and escalating the violence.

Her husband has filed a complaint with law enforcement authorities, prompting the registration of a case. Due to limited forensic facilities in Jiribam, Zosangkim’s remains were transferred to Silchar in Assam for a thorough examination. The attack has been condemned by ITAC as an act of ethnic cleansing, with the organisation urging immediate government intervention to protect vulnerable communities in the region. The killing has not only deepened the fear and resentment among the Kuki-Zo tribes but also added fuel to the fire of the ongoing ethnic conflict between the valley-based Meitei community and the hill-based Kuki-Zo groups. ITAC and other tribal leaders have described the attack as a direct assault on the community, warning that such acts of violence could lead to further escalation if left unaddressed. The rising unrest has prompted protests, with the Kuki-Zo community demanding justice for Zosangkim and better security for their people.

PRESS COMMUNIQUE – ITAC
8th Nov, 2024 pic.twitter.com/jZUCN3w1RY

— Indigenous Tribes Advocacy Committee (ITAC) (@itacofficial) November 8, 2024

“There was a gunfight, and the village was attacked last night. Around ten houses were burnt. The villagers informed us about the death of a Hmar community woman. They have taken the body. Our forensic teams are on the spot. There is no violence at the moment,” senior government officer from Jiribam as quoted by Hindustan Times.

Protests and outcry from Kuki-Zo women against targeted violence

In response to the horrific sexual assault of the tribal woman, hundreds of Kuki-Zo women organised demonstrations, with major protests taking place in Saikul Hill Town. Led by the Kuki Women Union Saikul and supported by the Committee on Tribal Unity (CoTU), the protesters expressed anger over the alleged inaction of the Jiribam District Administration and security forces, including the CRPF and Assam Rifles, accusing them of failing to protect the tribal community despite previous assurances. Protesters carried banners reading “We Condemn the Brutal Killing of Zosangkim Hmar” and “We Demand Union Territory with Legislature.” Prominent leaders, like Ngahpi Chongloi of the Kuki Women Union, expressed their disillusionment with the peace agreement signed in August, which they say gave the villagers a false sense of security. The protestors vowed to continue demonstrations until justice is served and perpetrators are held accountable.

Calls for greater security and autonomy

In the wake of the brutal rape and murder of Zosangkim Hmar, hundreds of Kuki-Zo women organised large-scale protests to demand justice, accountability, and greater security for their community. The protests, which quickly spread across the region, reached a peak in Saikul Hill Town, where a significant demonstration was led by the Kuki Women Union Saikul and supported by the Committee on Tribal Unity (CoTU). The anger of the protestors was palpable as they condemned not only the horrific crime but also the systemic neglect they believe their community has faced. The protesters gathered in the streets carrying banners emblazoned with slogans such as “We Condemn the Brutal Killing of Zosangkim Hmar” and “We Demand Union Territory with Legislature,” calling for urgent government action to address their long-standing grievances.

The demonstrators accused the Jiribam District Administration and security forces, including the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and Assam Rifles, of failing to protect the tribal communities in the region, despite previous assurances of safety. Leaders from Kuki-Zo organisations expressed frustration over the lack of meaningful intervention, especially after the peace agreement signed in August, which they claim failed to bring the promised stability. Prominent figures like Ngahpi Chongloi, from the Kuki Women Union, openly voiced their disillusionment with the agreement, arguing that it created a false sense of security for the vulnerable tribal villages. They believed that instead of fostering peace, the agreement merely masked deeper issues of systemic violence and ethnic tensions. The protesters pledged to keep the pressure on authorities, vowing to continue their demonstrations until justice is served, the perpetrators are brought to account, and concrete steps are taken to ensure the safety and dignity of the Kuki-Zo community in the region. 

Saikul,Manipur

The ongoing conflict for past one year has led to horrific acts against Kuki women, including rape, torture, and murder, with no justice so far.

Today’s sit-in protest in Saikul,organized by the Kuki Women Union,demands justice for the brutal rape and murder… pic.twitter.com/dGJLBayKbz

— Harmeet Kaur K (@iamharmeetK) November 11, 2024

Violence in response of violence

Just one day after the violence in Jiribam, which claimed the life of a woman, a fresh attack took place in Manipur’s Bishnupur district, leading to the death of 34-year-old Sapam Sophia Leima. The incident occurred on Saturday morning in Saiton village, a region that lies on the border between the Meitei-dominated Bishnupur district and the Kuki-Zo-dominated Churachandpur district.

According to police reports, a group of armed assailants, believed to be from Kuki-Zo communities, opened fire on a group of farmers working in a paddy field at Lailampat. In response, Border Security Force (BSF) personnel stationed in the area returned fire. However, the situation quickly escalated as local residents, outraged by the incident, staged a protest at the BSF post, holding the deceased woman’s body and accusing the central forces of negligence in handling the situation.

Alleged gunfight between security forces and militants leaves 11 dead in Jiribam

On November 11, violence in Jiribam district saw another escalation when media reported that an alleged gunfight broke out between security forces and suspected militants, which resulted in the death of 11 Hmar men. As per the official version provided, the confrontation began when suspected militants, reportedly armed and dressed in camouflage, launched a coordinated attack on a police station and a nearby CRPF camp. Security forces responded swiftly, resulting in a heavy exchange of fire that lasted over 40 minutes. The clashes led to the deaths of 11 individuals. However, the official narrative has sparked controversy, as many in the local Kuki-Zo community and human rights groups question the accuracy of this classification. Two CRPF personnel were also injured during the battle, with one in critical condition.

Uncovering the truth of today’s incident at Jiribam district of Manipur by CRPFs.

Licypriya affirms that the mission was a success. The Hmar village volunteers were being assaulted and killed under the order of Meitei Police OC Sanagakpam Ibomtombi Singh.#ManipurViolence… pic.twitter.com/bA5GsbPktp

— Lianbawi (@the_singtangpa) November 11, 2024

#ManipurConflict #jiribam

Today the CRPF magically turned up to shoot “purportedly militants” who are Village Volunteers but remained mute spectators when the #meiteimilitants torched houses ultimately killing Mrs. Zosangkim at Zairawn.

Furthermore, the nearest CRPF post is… pic.twitter.com/sovweGqHnS

— Official KSO Shillong (@kso_shillong) November 11, 2024

The officials also provided that the violence did not end with the gunfight itself; the suspected militants had also set fire to several shops and homes near Jakurador Karong market and Borobekra police station. 

This additional destruction has compounded the ongoing crisis in the area, displacing locals and escalating tensions. Security forces have launched further operations to “flush out” the militants, deploying reinforcements from the Assam Rifles, CRPF, and local police.

However, the deaths of the 11 individuals have sparked outrage and growing controversy. While the state has labelled them as militants, the Kuki-Zo community and several human rights advocates have questioned this identification. Many argue that these individuals may not have been militants at all and were instead civilians or non-combatants caught in the crossfire. This recurrent issue of labelling deceased individuals as militants, without independent investigations or clear evidence, has fuelled deep mistrust within the affected communities. The state’s narrative is seen by some as a convenient justification for the ongoing military operations and the suppression of ethnic groups in the region. The calls for impartial investigations into these deaths and the proper classification of the deceased are growing louder, with demands for transparency and justice.

In response to the deadly confrontation, the Kuki-Zo Council declared a shutdown in the hill areas from 5 am to 6 pm on November 12, to “express collective grief and solidarity” with those who lost their lives. 

Despite efforts from security forces to regain control of the area, including additional deployments and increased operations, clashes and intermittent gunfire continue to be reported, particularly in the Imphal Valley. Tensions remain high as armed groups from both the Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities engage in violent confrontations, further exacerbating the already fragile security situation. The ongoing violence, coupled with the controversial handling of the deaths, has intensified calls for a comprehensive peace process that addresses the root causes of the conflict and ensures justice for all those affected.

Mounting ethnic tensions and humanitarian concerns amid Manipur’s escalating crisis

Manipur has been wracked by ethnic violence since last year, primarily between the valley-based Meitei community and the hill-based Kuki-Zo groups. The death of Zosangkim Hmar and other following incidents have intensified these divides, as Kuki-Zo leaders have publicly criticised what they see as the government’s inadequate response to the escalating violence. While central security forces have been deployed, many local residents feel that the conflict is being treated as a mere law-and-order issue, rather than a pressing humanitarian crisis that requires a more comprehensive approach.

The Kuki-Zo organisations and leaders have issued statements urging the government to take decisive action not only for immediate safety but also to establish long-term protections and ensure justice for the victims of the violence. In a statement, one Kuki-Zo spokesperson stressed the ongoing trauma faced by their communities, describing the emotional and physical toll of the violence and urging immediate intervention for peace and stability. As ethnic violence persists in regions like Jiribam and parts of Imphal Valley, residents express fear over worsening conditions and call for stronger, more proactive government involvement to prevent future bloodshed and support conflict-affected communities.

The recent string of violent incidents has also highlighted the precarious situation for farmers in Manipur’s conflict-prone areas, as attacks and gunfire from militants have disrupted the harvest season, with many farmers now fearful of working in the fields. The mounting crisis has displaced thousands, destroyed countless homes, and left hundreds of people dead, with local relief camps struggling to provide adequate shelter and resources. As the conflict between Meitei and Kuki-Zo communities continues, the region faces deepening humanitarian needs that many fears may take years to resolve, underscoring calls for a peace-building process that addresses both immediate security concerns and the underlying ethnic and political tensions fuelling the violence.

Deep homesickness among Manipur’s displaced despite government assistance

The violence that erupted in Manipur on May 3 last year has left a devastating mark, with over 60,000 people displaced, more than 230 killed, 1,500 injured, and 32 missing. Among the displaced are over 24,000 children under 18. Many internally displaced persons (IDPs) are currently living in government relief camps, feeling the pangs of homesickness as they enter another month away from their homes. According to a recent estimate, Manipur’s population has grown from 28.56 lakh in the 2011 Census to around 36.49 lakh in 2024, reflecting the vast scale of displacement in the state.

A report of the Hindustan Times provided an insight into the mental state of the people suffering through this displacement. Lucky, a displaced resident from Moreh, now at Porompat Relief Camp in Imphal East, told Hindustan Times that the government’s efforts to support IDPs have been largely appreciated. He noted that IDPs and displaced students (IDS) receive essential aid, including free education in nearby private and public schools. However, he emphasised that the peace process needs to accelerate to allow IDPs to finally return home.

The psychological toll on children, especially in the early months of displacement, has been severe. According to Lucky, many children experienced intense trauma, often crying and screaming in their sleep with haunting memories of the violence, expressing fears like, “Don’t hurt us” and “Don’t kill us.” The HT report also provides that there is a 12-year-old girl residing at another relief camp in Imphal West district shared her lingering fear of loud noises, saying, “They remind me of the night of May 3 in Churachandpur, when we were fleeing, and my father was assaulted trying to protect us.” Despite the resources at her new school, including uniforms, textbooks, and transportation, she expressed a longing to return home.

Her mother added that the government has organised free health camps and mental health awareness sessions, which have helped all ages to some extent. However, her daughter continues to miss her former friends and school in Churachandpur, longing for a return to normalcy.

The All Manipur School Students’ Transporter Association has shown solidarity with IDS, providing free van services for those who lost parents in the crisis, while offering discounted services to others. Additionally, on October 31, the National Tobacco Control Program and the District Health Society of Imphal East launched the “Tobacco-Free Youth Campaign 2.0” in response to the observed rise in tobacco use among youth in relief camps.

Lourembam Suresh, an IDP staying in Imphal, revealed how the crisis has driven many adults to tobacco use as a coping mechanism. “If I had a job, I might be able to cut down,” he admitted, emphasizing the need for greater employment opportunities within relief camps. Chief Medical Officer of Imphal East, Dr. Lourembam Indira, confirmed that mental health professionals have been visiting camps regularly to help address issues like increased school dropouts and substance use among displaced youth.

Mental health and economic challenges: Government efforts and unmet needs

Deputy Commissioner of Imphal East, Khumanthem Diana, addressed the media, acknowledging the lasting physical and mental effects of the crisis on IDPs. As per the HT report, she stressed the importance of continued health and mental health camps at the relief centers, while IDPs have also benefited from free counseling sessions provided by the government. In support of displaced families, Manipur Chief Minister N. Biren Singh recently announced a grant of ₹1,000 for each IDP to mark Diwali and Ningol Chakouba festivals, with an additional ₹1 lakh in financial support for each IDP family provided in installments.

However, not everyone finds comfort in financial aid. Bijita, an IDP at Sajiwa Relief Camp in Imphal East, voiced a poignant sentiment: “I don’t want any financial assistance for Ningol Chakouba. What I want is for IDP women to return to their homes as a gift for Ningol Chakouba.” Recalling how both her husband’s and maternal homes were destroyed, she expressed a yearning to celebrate in her ancestral home.

The violence has cast a shadow over Manipur’s cultural festivities, with traditional celebrations such as Diwali and Ningol Chakouba largely subdued. Nevertheless, Susila, an IDP from Churachandpur now relocated to the Alternate Housing Complex in Langol, Imphal West, observed some improvements in mental health for IDPs in her new surroundings, where 269 people have been settled. “Last year, we couldn’t celebrate Ningol Chakouba, but this year we’ve received invitations, and many of us are ready to participate,” she said, hinting at a cautious optimism.

Yet, even amidst such hope, economic challenges remain a pressing issue for IDPs without government jobs or stable incomes. The government has ensured that essential supplies are available, but as Susila pointed out, the long-term absence of employment opportunities continues to weigh on many, according to the HT report.

Related:

“Leaked Intelligence report” on alleged Kuki militants entering Manipur from Myanmar sparks panic, later retracted by authorities

Manipur plunges into deeper turmoil amid fresh violence and drone attacks since early September

Manipur on Edge: Violent Clashes Erupt on the day following Kuki-Zo Protests Demanding Separate Administration, action against state CM based on leaked tapes

The post Fresh violence grips Manipur: Clashes in Jiribam and widespread protests after rape and brutal killings appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The irony of the Mahayuti government now championing the Constitution through campaigns like “Ghar Ghar Sambhavidhan” is glaring, especially given its own troubling history of undermining constitutional principles. From the very moment of its formation, the government has been marred by constitutional controversies. The Eknath Shinde-led coalition itself came into existence after a dramatic political coup, where defecting legislators bypassed democratic norms, raising serious questions about constitutional propriety. This was followed by a series of actions that further eroded constitutional values—ranging from bulldozer politics that disregarded due process to systematic attacks on dissent, and the selective targeting of marginalised communities. After repeatedly trampling upon the very ethos of the Constitution, it is deeply ironic, and indeed cynical, for this government to now promote itself as a defender of constitutional values. This sudden embrace of constitutional imagery in the run-up to the elections seems more like a strategic ploy to reclaim lost moral ground rather than a genuine commitment to safeguarding the foundational document of Indian democracy.

The expensive price tag of political propaganda

Before we dive into the irony of the advertisement, it is essential to point towards the financial cost of these advertisements, estimated to be upwards of ₹15–25 lakh for full-page placements in high-circulation dailies like Maharashtra Times and Lok Satta, is substantial. For perspective, multiple full-page ads in these leading publications over several days could cost the government crores of rupees. This expenditure begs the question: Why is the state splurging on image-building campaigns when Maharashtra faces urgent fiscal challenges? While these advertisements are a clear attempt to boost the image of the Mahayuti government ahead of elections, what’s often overlooked is who’s footing the bill for this political propaganda: it’s the taxpayer. Public funds—our taxes—are being used to pay for these ads that serve little more than to bolster the political capital of the ruling government.

Maharashtra’s public sector continues to grapple with a host of issues—rural healthcare infrastructure is overstretched, drought-hit farmers continue to demand support, and unemployment rates are rising. Despite these pressing needs, state funds are being diverted toward political advertising, and not just any advertising, but a clear attempt to consolidate votes before the election code of conduct is enforced. The misuse of public money for electioneering feels particularly egregious. Instead of being channelled into improving healthcare, education, or providing meaningful support to drought-affected farmers, taxpayer money is being diverted toward high-cost political advertisements. This blatant misuse of public resources for partisan gain not only raises ethical concerns but also underscores a government that prioritises its electoral fortunes over the actual needs of its citizens.

Take for instance the advertisement featuring Devendra Fadnavis himself. Prominently featuring Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s image, it seeks to position the coalition of Shiv Sena (Shinde faction), National Congress Party (Ajit Pawar faction) and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) as the protector of constitutional values. However, behind the façade lies a government that has, on multiple occasions, shown contempt for the Constitution’s core principles of equality, justice, and fraternity.

The misuse of Ambedkar’s legacy

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar is a figure synonymous with the Indian Constitution, but his image has often, more so in the recent times, been co-opted by political parties for electoral gain. The “Ghar Ghar Sambhavidhan” campaign is an example of this strategic co-optation. At a time when Dalits and those marginalised communities continue to face violence, discrimination, and exploitation, invoking Ambedkar’s legacy without addressing the core issues affecting these communities is an exercise in tokenism.

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s life was dedicated to dismantling the oppressive caste system and fighting for the rights of Dalits and other marginalised communities. However, the Mahayuti government’s invocation of Ambedkar’s image through campaigns like “Ghar Ghar Sambhavidhan” rings hollow when juxtaposed with the escalating violence, discrimination, and land-related exploitation faced by Dalits and Adivasis in Maharashtra. While Ambedkar’s face is splashed across newspaper ads, Maharashtra’s Dalit and Adivasi communities continue to bear the brunt of systematic oppression and neglect under the very government that claims to uphold his ideals.

In March 2020, a brutal case of atrocity against Dalit women had surfaced from Solapur district, wherein a 16-year-old Dalit girl had been gang-raped by 10 men for more than 6 months, underscoring the stark reality of caste-based sexual violence in Maharashtra. The girl’s family faced immense pressure from the perpetrators to withdraw the complaint, while local authorities delayed taking action, sparking protests and demonstrations demanding justice. In August 2023, in Satara, Maharashtra, a Dalit woman had faced public humiliation and assault. Her only “crime” was daring to demand the return of money she was reportedly owed. These cases mirror the growing epidemic of violence against Dalit women in the state, where crimes of rape, assault, and social ostracisation are disturbingly frequent.

In November 2023, on Maharashtra’s Beed, a Tribal woman had been stripped naked by tearing her clothes, molested and beaten for land disputes. The heinous crime had been committed in the presence of police, and those involved included a BJP MLA Suresh Dhas’s wife along with three people.

In October 2023, four Dalit children had been hung from a tree upside down and thrashed for “stealing goats and pigeons” in Srirampur in Ahmednagar district. This deep-rooted casteism is a direct affront to Ambedkar’s fight for land and economic equality, yet the state government has been silent in addressing these ongoing attacks.

Furthermore, across rural Maharashtra, Dalit farmers are facing increasing threats of land grabbing, forced evictions, and illegal occupation of their agricultural lands. As many as 81% of Dalit farmers in Maharashtra were agricultural labourers, who had no land of their own and worked on others’ farmland as opposed to 49% of landless farmers among non-Dalits, according to Census 2011.  Even today, in many cases, state authorities turn a blind eye to these atrocities, failing to protect Dalit farmers’ rights to land and livelihood.

The displacement of Adivasi communities has also surged in recent years. A notable case occurred in the tribal regions of Palghar and Nashik in 2020, where Adivasis were forcibly evicted from their lands to make way for government infrastructure projects. These land grabs were carried out without proper compensation or resettlement, leaving entire communities destitute and without basic means of survival. Adivasis, who have historically been among the most marginalised groups in Indian society, find themselves repeatedly deprived of their constitutional right to land, despite the government’s public commitment to protecting the Constitution.

In Gadchiroli, in 2023, another alarming incident saw forest rights activists, including Adivasi leaders, beaten and detained for protesting the illegal encroachment of their forest lands by private contractors. This blatant disregard for the Forest Rights Act, which guarantees land rights to indigenous communities, reflects the deepening crisis in Maharashtra’s tribal belts. Dr. Ambedkar’s legacy, which emphasised the protection of marginalised communities and their access to land, is being blatantly violated by the state’s development policies, often at the behest of private industrial interests.

Another case that highlights caste violence occurred in February 2022, when a Dalit family in Latur district was attacked and boycotted for entering a local temple. The upper-caste mob severely beat the family members, accusing them of “defiling” the temple, a throwback to the deeply entrenched untouchability practices Ambedkar fought against. Even in September 2024, a Shiv Sena leader, purportedly a close aide of Maharashtra CM Eknath Shinde, had been booked along with several others for allegedly preventing Dalits from entering a temple. The local police initially refused to register a case, demonstrating how institutionalised caste bias continues to deprive Dalits of their basic rights, even in modern Maharashtra.

The grim reality for Maharashtra’s Dalits and Adivasis stands in stark contrast to the Mahayuti government’s public posture of honouring Ambedkar’s legacy. While the government spends crores on advertisements featuring Ambedkar’s image, the very communities he sought to uplift are being left vulnerable to exploitation, violence, and systemic marginalisation. The deliberate use of Ambedkar’s legacy in electoral campaigns without addressing the state’s failing record on Dalit and Adivasi rights reflects a cynical and opportunistic politics—one that exploits historical symbols for short-term political gain while ignoring the lived realities of the most oppressed sections of society. In this light, the state’s public campaigns appear less as a genuine commitment to constitutional principles and more as a cynical attempt to secure votes from marginalised communities ahead of elections.

Maharashtra, like other BJP-ruled states, has seen a rise in caste-based atrocities and systemic discrimination. In 2022 alone, the state recorded a total of 2276 cases of atrocities against Dalits under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, including heinous cases of violence and rape. Dr. Ambedkar’s vision for social justice is far removed from the reality faced by Dalit communities in Maharashtra today, and the state government’s actions have done little to address these grave injustices.

Trampling upon constitutional values: The reality

While the government speaks of safeguarding the Constitution through its campaigns, its actions paint a different picture. Multiple incidents highlight how the Eknath Shinde-led administration has failed to uphold constitutional values in practice.

Bulldozer justice and lack of due process: Maharashtra has seen instances where the state, like several other BJP-ruled states, has resorted to demolition drives targeting the homes of the accused before trials are even conducted. These extrajudicial actions violate the fundamental right to life and property as enshrined under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The most notable recent instance of bulldozer being used against Dalits was on June 6, when state authorities razed Jai Bhim Nagar in Powai to the ground. It is essential to note that even though demolitions and evictions are prohibited in the state during monsoons, civic and state authorities collude with developers and builders to carry out these alleged lawless evictions. 

The shrinking space for dissent: In Maharashtra, the crackdown on dissent has been particularly severe, with Adivasi rights activists facing relentless persecution for standing up against state-backed exploitation of their lands and resources. The state’s targeting of activists advocating for tribal rights underscores a broader trend of silencing dissent and crushing resistance from marginalised groups. From the tribal regions of Gadchiroli, where those protesting illegal land acquisitions by private contractors have faced brutal retaliation, including physical violence and arbitrary detention, to Palghar evictions, the state has abused its brutal power against those dissenting against him.

One also cannot forget the infamous Bhima Koregaon case, which is another chilling example of how dissent, especially from Dalit and Adivasi rights activists, has been criminalised in Maharashtra. The case stems from the January 2018 Bhima Koregaon violence, where clashes broke out after Dalits gathered to commemorate the 200th anniversary of the Battle of Bhima Koregaon, a symbolic event marking Dalit pride and resistance. However, in the aftermath, several prominent activists—many of whom had a history of defending Adivasi and Dalit rights—were arrested under draconian anti-terror laws, accused of being part of an alleged Maoist conspiracy to incite violence.

Among those targeted were well-known intellectuals and human rights defenders like Sudha Bharadwaj, an Adivasi rights lawyer, and late Father Stan Swamy, an 84-year-old Jesuit priest who had spent decades working to protect Adivasi land rights in Jharkhand and Maharashtra. The Bhima Koregaon case, which was initially about caste-based violence, was quickly transformed into a case about “national security,” with the state using the spectre of Maoism to suppress voices advocating for Dalit and Adivasi rights. The arrests of these activists not only stifled a crucial movement for social justice but also sent a chilling message to those working for the rights of marginalised communities in Maharashtra. It highlighted the shrinking space for dissent, where speaking up against caste violence, land grabs, and state excesses could be framed as a crime.

This pattern of state repression is also visible in the treatment of grassroots activists who oppose large-scale development projects that threaten to displace Adivasi communities from their ancestral lands. The government’s ruthless crackdown on these voices reflects its prioritisation of corporate interests over the rights of indigenous populations, while branding activists as “anti-development” or “urban Naxals” to justify their suppression. One must not forget that only in June 2024, the Maharashtra government tabled the Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill, 2024 on the penultimate day of just concluded session of the state assembly (Vidhan Sabha). The said bill, introduced by the state’s industries minister Uday Samant, was deemed to be brought in to stop the “proliferation of Urban Naxalism” in the state of Maharashtra.

Political expediency at the cost of governance

In the weeks leading up to the elections, the Eknath Shinde government has also issued a series of populist government orders, many of which appear designed to win votes rather than address long-standing problems. Many “beneficial policies” for the marginalised are being hastily rolling out s to win voter favour before the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) takes effect. In a clear election ploy, CM Eknath Shinde announced the waiving of tolls for light vehicles at all five entry points to Mumbai, effective midnight. This decision comes just days before elections are expected to be declared, aligning with a pattern of voter-friendly initiatives that prioritise political gain over substantive governance.  Notably, the toll waiver affects entry points at Vashi, Airoli, Mulund (LBS Road), Mulund (Eastern Express Highway), and Dahisar, where tolls were recently raised to Rs 45. Critics argue this move is a transparent gimmick to distract from more pressing issues.

Additionally, the Cabinet has approved salary hikes for madrasa teachers and increased the budget of the Maulana Azad Minority Financial Development Corporation from Rs 700 crore to Rs 1,000 crore. The government is also seeking to attract OBC and tribal voters by raising the non-creamy layer income limit for OBCs from Rs 8 lakh to Rs 15 lakh and doubling the guarantee for the Shabari Tribal Finance Corporation from Rs 50 crore to Rs 100 crore.

While these initiatives may appear beneficial, their timing raises concerns about their true intent, suggesting a focus on short-term electoral gains rather than addressing long-standing socio-economic challenges in the state. It is also ironical as the state has dragged its feet on providing meaningful relief for years, this sudden rush of policies ahead of elections reflects poorly on its intentions.

One glaring example of this election-oriented governance is the delay in resolving the long-pending Maratha reservation issue. Although the state government expressed its commitment to resolving the demands of the Maratha community, it has failed to bring about substantial solutions, choosing instead to delay contentious decisions to avoid political backlash. But now, as elections draw near, the same issues that were left on the back burner are being dusted off and used to appease the agitated electorate. This pattern of governance by political expediency is evident, yet the government hopes to manipulate voters by promising last-minute relief.

A gimmick wrapped in Constitutional drapes

The Eknath Shinde-led government’s actions are a masterclass in political posturing. By rolling out expensive, taxpayer-funded advertisements and issuing symbolic government orders in the eleventh hour, the administration is hoping to distract the electorate from its failures and shortcomings. The use of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s image to bolster its claims of constitutional integrity is a cynical move, especially in light of the numerous instances where this very government has undermined the values Ambedkar stood for.

As Maharashtra heads toward its elections, the electorate must critically assess whether these last-minute, high-cost campaigns and symbolic gestures represent genuine governance or if they are merely a well-timed charade designed to retain power. The people of Maharashtra deserve more than gimmicks and propaganda; they deserve a government that truly respects and upholds the Constitution, not just in words but in action.

Related:

Despite legal promises, hate speech prosecutions in Maharashtra remain paralysed

Bombay HC chastens Maharashtra Police for shoddy investigation in cases involving sexual assault against minors and women

Maharashtra: Swift action on protesters, delayed justice for sexual assault against minors, police priorities need to be questioned

Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill tabled in assembly, using the myth of “urban naxals” to supress dissent?

The post Pre-Election Gimmickry, Maharashtra: Mahayuti govt compelled to appropriate INDIA alliance Constitution driven call? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

To list a few major changes, all of which will be discussed below, the new legislation makes it mandatory for Muslim couples to register their (Muslim) marriages and divorces. It makes it necessary for the couple to follow the procedure prescribed in the legislation for the registration of their marriage, which includes serving a marriage notice to the Marriage and Divorce Registrar either before or after the wedding to provide the scope for hearing out objections, if any. The application for registration must be submitted within 30 days of the marriage ceremony, and the certificate can only be issued once the registrar is satisfied that no valid objections exist. The 2024 Bill prevents the marriage registrar from solemnising a marriage until any objections have been thoroughly investigated.

Another change that has been introduced through the new bill is that a minimum legal age for marriage has been set at 18 years for the bride 18 or 21 years for the groom. Any registration of marriage has been explicitly prohibited if this condition has not been met.

The introduction and passing of the said 2024 bill has raised many questions, with the first being that the question of “Muslim personal law being attacked”. Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma defended the new law, emphasising its intent to improve the lives of young girls and prevent child marriages. The stance maintained by the government is that the said bill, which has been introduced by Revenue and Disaster Management Minister Jogen Mohan, is aimed to fully eliminate the registration of child marriages. Other reasons provided behind bringing the new law was to ensuring marriages are consensual, and to curb polygamy. The bill also seeks to end the role of Kazis in the registration process of Muslim marriages, which CM Sarma had argued complicates the procedure unnecessarily.

Brief background on the erstwhile Assam (Muslim) Marriages and Divorces Registration Act, 1935:

On August 28 itself, while introducing the new legislation, the Assam Assembly has simultaneously repealed the 89-year-old Assam Muslim Marriage and Divorce Registration Act, 1935, which had governed the registration of Muslim marriages and divorces until then. The old law, rooted in Muslim personal law, allowed the state to license individuals, referred to as Kazis, to register Muslim marriages and divorces. There were 95 such Kazis across Assam, considered public servants.

The decision to repeal the 1935 Act had been passed by the Assam State Cabinet in February 2024. In March 2024, the government first issued an Ordinance, nullifying the existing law. Since then, there has been no specific legislation governing Muslim marriage and divorce registration in the state. It is important to note that while the 1935 Act had originally made marriage registration voluntary, a 2010 amendment, Section 2A, made registration mandatory even in the earlier law.

The current, BJP-dominated state government has criticised certain provisions of the old law, particularly those parts which did not specify a minimum legal age for marriage and instead allowed for the guardians of minors to submit applications on their behalf. In the old law, Section 8 had allowed guardians to apply for marriage registration on behalf of minors, and Section 10 had contained similar provisions in the context of entering marriages into the register.

The old law also authorised the state to license only two individuals—one Shia and one Sunni—to perform the role of Muslim marriage registrars, as outlined in Section 3. These registrars were provided seals and certificate books by the state.

Notably, the 1935 Act had also contained a ‘saving’ clause under Section 24, which ensured that a Muslim marriage or divorce would not be invalidated if it was not registered. Furthermore, registration itself did not automatically validate a marriage or divorce. In contrast, the new bill outlines a more detailed process for both solemnisation and registration of marriages, including inviting objections. However, unlike the repealed law, it does not contain a saving clause or clarify the consequences of failing to register a marriage.

A Supreme Court lawyer, who was one of the counsels in the triple talaq case, told ThePrint that absence of a saving clause or ambiguity in the bill on the status of a non-registered Muslim marriage shows that the law is not mandatory. However, in the backdrop of this new law, the state can, through other executive orders, ensure registration becomes compulsory.

“The state can issue directions to its agencies, asking them to only accept marriage registration certificates issued by the Marriage and Divorce registrar for issuance of a ration card or providing benefits under official welfare schemes,” the lawyer explained, as per the report.

Debate in the Assam Assembly during the passing of the bill:

Chief Minister Sarma described the decision as a significant step toward eradicating child marriages, noting that the 1935 Act allowed for the registration of marriages involving minors. Under Muslim personal law, puberty is presumed at 15 years old, and the Act included provisions enabling guardians to register marriages on behalf of minors.

A day prior to the passing of the bill, debates took place in the Assam Assembly with regards to the repealing of the previous 1935 and the new 2024 Bill. Aminul Islam, MLA from the opposition AIUDF (All India United Democratic Front) representing Mankachar, questioned the necessity of repealing the 1935 Act, suggesting that its objectives—such as preventing child marriages—could have been achieved through amendments to Sections 8 and Section 10 of the old law. Islam highlighted that the 1935 Act, initially voluntary, had already been amended in the year 2010 to make marriage registration compulsory.

In response, Chief Minister Sarma argued that amendments alone would not have sufficed, as the government also sought to end the role of Kazis in the marriage registration process. Sarma referenced last year’s crackdown on child marriages, in which over 4,000 people were arrested, including men who had married underage girls and the Kazis or religious figures who had solemnised these marriages. (Detailed report on the same may be read here.)

Sarma explained that during these cases, Kazis defended their actions in court, claiming the legal authority to register child marriages under the Muslim Marriage and Divorce Registration Act. As a result, some were granted bail by the High Court. (Detailed report on the same can be read here.)

“…We found that the Kazis register child marriages… When the cases came up in the High Court, they said that they have the power to register child marriages…and…the High Court gave them bail because Kazis have the power to register child marriages under the Muslim Marriage and Divorce Registration Act… It means that they (Kazis) are not opposed to child marriage in principle,” the chief minister said.

According to Sarma, the above stance taken by the Kazis demonstrated that they were not fundamentally opposed to child marriage. He asserted that having government officers handle marriage registration would ensure greater accountability, as per a report of Indian Express.

Sarma also cited the Supreme Court’s 2006 ruling in Seema vs. Ashwani Kumar, which directed the union and state governments to ensure compulsory marriage registration. He emphasised that the state could not rely on Kazis—whom he referred to as “private entities” during the debate—for this responsibility.

Advocate Nekibur Zaman, a member of a state-appointed committee on banning polygamy, added that many Kazis misused their power, allowing underage marriages and improper divorces, reinforcing the need to repeal the law.

Islam further argued that the simpler registration process under the older law had now been replaced by a more complicated one, drawn from the Special Marriage Act, which typically governs inter-religious marriages. He expressed concern that making the registration of marriages between two Muslims so complex could have a negative impact on “lakhs of people.”

It is essential to note that Sarma clarified that existing marriages registered by Kazis would remain valid, and only new marriages would be subject to the new legislation. He also noted that marriages prohibited under Islamic law would not be registered.

Key features of the new law:

1. Mandatory Registration: Muslim marriages and divorces must now be registered with the government, not through Kazis. This applies to both prospective and already solemnised marriages.
2. Legal Age Requirement: The law stipulates that women must be at least 18 years old and men at least 21 years old for their marriage to be registered and considered valid. Marriages involving minors will not be registered.
3. Notice and Objection Process: According to Section 4, a Muslim couple intending to marry must provide a marriage notice to the Marriage and Divorce Registrar of their district, where one of the parties must have resided for at least 30 days.

Section 5 of the bill says the Marriage and Divorce Registrar shall publish notice in a “conspicuous place” in office about the notice given by the couple. If one of the two partners is not residing within the jurisdiction of the registrar, the bill warrants the officer to affix the said notice in the district office of the area where that partner lives.

The registrar is required to publish this notice, allowing anyone to raise objections within 30 days if the marriage violates conditions laid out in Section 3, such as issues of consent or prohibited relationships under Muslim law.

As for Section 3, a marriage can be registered if only a proper ceremony has been performed for wedlock and the two have been living as husband and wife; the parties have been residing in the district of the marriage and divorce registrar for at least 30 days preceding the date of marriage.

Other conditions include consent of both parties for the wedding; the parties are free from any kind of legal disability such as not being within the prohibited degree of relationship as per the Shariat or Muslim law and documents are documents identifying the parties to the marriage, among others.

Moreover, the parties will have to submit a declaration confirming the fulfilment of the above-mentioned conditions.

1. Inquiry into Objections: If an objection is raised, the registrar must conduct an inquiry within 30 days to determine its validity. If satisfied with the conditions, the marriage may be registered; otherwise, the registration can be prohibited. Couples can appeal the decision to the District Registrar and further to the Registrar General of Marriages, whose decision will be final.
2. Solemnisation of Marriage: A marriage can only be registered if the couple has lived as husband and wife, and if certain criteria—such as consent, absence of legal prohibitions, and proper ceremonies—are met. Violating the registration requirements can lead to up to one year of imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50,000.
3. Penalties for forgery and misconduct: If someone submits fake or forged documents to register a marriage or divorce, they could face up to two years of imprisonment, a fine of Rs. 10,000, or both. Additionally, they may be prosecuted under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 for the offence of forgery. Registrars who knowingly register marriages in violation of the law may also be imprisoned for up to one year and fined up to Rs. 50,000.
4. Special provisions for underage marriages: If the registrar discovers either party is underage, they are required to report the case to the Child Marriage Protection Officer, triggering legal action under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006.
5. Impact on Kazis: The new law effectively removes the role of Kazis in the registration process. Chief Minister Sarma emphasised that the bill’s aim is not only to end child marriages but also to transfer the authority of registering marriages and divorces from Kazis to government officers, increasing accountability.
6. Marriages solemnised under personal law: The law acknowledges the traditional Nikah or other Muslim ceremonies, but insists on government registration to ensure compliance with legal age and consent requirements.
7. Rights and protections for women: The bill aims to safeguard the rights of married Muslim women, enabling them to claim their matrimonial rights, maintenance, and inheritance. It also aims to prevent men from abandoning their wives after marriage without legal consequences.
8. Penalties for issuing false certificates: Section 18 of the bill allows for public inspection of the registers and deems them admissible evidence. Registrars are the only ones authorised to file complaints regarding false certificates.

The complete bill may be accessed here:

Concerns raised against the new 2024 bill:

Advocate Mrinmoy Datta, speaking to SabrangIndia, pointed out potential concerns with the bill, suggesting it may have retrospective implications. According to him, under Section 3, all marriages conducted before the Act’s commencement would need to be registered, which could lead to legal issues for couples who have been married for years without formal registration.

“Prima facie this bill proposes give the law retrospective effect as under section 3 all marriages solemnised before the commencement of the Act shall have to be registered.”

Advocate Dutta, who practices at the Guwahati High Court, also warned that non-registration under Section 19 might be treated as a criminal offense, potentially leading to harassment of couples in long-standing marriages. Additionally, advocate Dutta highlighted that Section 9 suggests that marriages involving minors, even if solemnised before the Act, could result in prosecution under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, potentially disrupting families.

“Non-registration under section 19 is likely to be treated as a criminal offense because non registration would make even the subsisting marriage contrary to section 3 which can lead to unnecessary harassment to people who have been living a happy married life for years. Section 9 also seems to suggest that if the marriage registrar finds that a marriage which was already solemnised before the commencement of this act but the parties might have been minors at that point of time can be prosecuted under the Prohibition of the Child marriage Act 2006 which can disrupt happy family lives.”

As per a report of Indian Express, Advocate Zunaid Khalid from the Assam Millat Foundation also pointed claim of the state government to curb child marriages through this new law, emphasising that it could have simply amended the 1935 Act to specify that only marriages of individuals of legal age could be registered. He expressed concern that repealing the Act might lead to more unregistered marriages, as the process under the Special Marriage Act, which has now been adopted for Muslim marriages, is more complex, especially for the poor and illiterate.

Advocate Aman Wadud, a member of the Congress party, echoed these concerns. He pointed out that the previous Act allowed for a decentralised registration process, with 94 Kazis across the state. Replacing this with the Act, which requires a one-month notice period and more documentation, could lead to a reduction in marriage registrations and the rise of unregistered Kazis.

Are these politically driven reforms?

The political context of the repeal plays a significant role behind the concerns being raised by the people of Assam as well as the lack of trust that exists on the state government.  In the recent months, the BJP-led government of Assam has increasingly been raising the “issue” of immigration and demographic changes in the state to target the Muslim population of the state, which is about 34%. Out of the 34%, Bengali-origin Muslims have been targeted by the current government again and again.

The changes being forced by the Sarma government under the guise of social reform in Assam, particularly with respect to family laws and marriage regulations, raise significant concerns about political motivations, discriminatory impacts, and the potential erosion of personal freedoms. While the government claims that these changes—such as the crackdown on child marriages, plans to criminalise polygamy, and the push for a Uniform Civil Code (UCC)—are aimed at addressing social issues and promoting gender justice, a closer examination reveals a more complex and troubling agenda.

Firstly, the disproportionate targeting of the Muslim community, especially Bengali-origin Muslims, is evident in these reforms. The government’s sweeping crackdown on child marriages last year resulted in more than 62% of arrests being from the Muslim community. While child marriage is undoubtedly a serious issue that needs to be addressed, the focus on one community risks reinforcing communal stereotypes and feeding into majoritarian politics. This is particularly concerning in a state like Assam, where anti-Muslim sentiment has long been tied to anxieties about immigration issues. The government’s actions, therefore, seem less about genuine social reform and more about demonising a particular group under the pretext of protecting women and children.

Secondly, the repeal of the 1935, and its replacement with stricter registration requirements, effectively removes a simple, decentralised process that had been functioning for decades. The argument that the law was “outdated” and allowed Kazis to register child marriages ignores the fact that amending the law to eliminate such loopholes could have been a more balanced solution. Instead, the Sarma government chose to repeal the entire Act, which forces Muslim marriages to be registered under the Special Marriage Act—a far more complex and bureaucratic process. The one-month notice period, the documentation requirements, and the need to engage with the District Commissioner’s office pose significant barriers, especially for poor, rural, and illiterate individuals. The outcome will likely be fewer registered marriages, pushing many Muslims towards unregistered, informal marriages, which could, ironically, undermine the very accountability the government claims to seek.

The government’s move to criminalise polygamy underlines its ambition to implement a Uniform Civil Code, a long-standing goal of the BJP. While promoting a UCC in the name of equality and gender justice may sound progressive, in practice, it is being pushed in a way that disproportionately affects minority communities, particularly Muslims, whose personal laws allow for polygamy. The push for a UCC is less about ensuring equality and more about homogenising legal practices to fit a majoritarian vision of India. This drive ignores the cultural and religious autonomy that is protected under India’s Constitution. The exemption for tribal communities further underscores the selective application of these laws. By exempting certain groups, the government acknowledges that a one-size-fits-all approach is not suitable for India’s diverse communities—yet it seems unwilling to extend this understanding to Muslim personal law.

The Sarma government’s actions seem to be catering to this base of Assamese supremacist voices, who view Muslims as a threat to the cultural and political fabric of the state. By framing these legal changes as steps towards eradicating child marriage and polygamy, the government is effectively othering the Muslim community, suggesting that their personal laws are inherently backward or harmful. This feeds into a broader narrative of Islamophobia, where Muslims are portrayed as lawbreakers or out of step with modern Indian values.

In this background, one cannot view the changes being brought in by the Sarma government as merely social reforms aimed at protecting women and children. They are part of a larger political strategy to marginalise Assam’s Muslim population under the guise of legal uniformity and gender justice. These changes, when viewed in the broader context of the government’s actions on family law, immigration, and demography, raise serious concerns about communal bias, discrimination, and the erosion of personal and religious freedoms in the state.

Related:

Assam government introduces stricter Aadhaar rules amid concerns over population discrepancies, increases chances of bureaucracy in the process 

Families torn asunder: 28 Bengali Muslims taken from homes, detained as “Declared Foreigners” in Assam

Assam CM call to expel ‘Miya Muslims,’ leads to violence against Bengali speaking Muslim Labourers

Assam: Partial relief, over 9 lakh people to get Aadhaar card, serious questions for excluded 18 lakh

Assam CM compares districts of Assam with Bangladesh; calls some of the districts ‘tiny Bangladesh’

Muslims and the Myths Surrounding Polygamy in India

The post New Assam Muslim Marriages & Divorces Bill: Reform or politics? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It is in this content that the report opens with the line “The sky is full of mysteries, with the twinkling stars and the beautiful moon. But scientific investigation revealed that the stars do not twinkle, nor does the moon look beautiful. Do not trust what you see; even salt looks like sugar.” The said statement denoted the widespread culture of sexual harassment prevailing in the Malayalam and the fear of retaliation that the women face, underscoring that while the sky may seem full of mysteries with its twinkling stars and beautiful moon, scientific scrutiny reveals that stars don’t actually twinkle, nor is the moon inherently beautiful. Similarly, the film industry, though appearing glamorous on the surface, hides grim truths beneath its veneer. 

The delay in the release of the report and the industry control

The Justice Hema Committee, chaired by retired Kerala High Court Justice K. Hema, was established in 2017 following the kidnapping and assault of an actress, a crime allegedly orchestrated by actor Dileep out of personal vengeance. The actress-victim who has worked in Tamil, Telugu and Malayalam films was allegedly abducted and molested in her car for two hours by some of the accused, who had forced their way into the vehicle on the night of February 17, 2017 and later escaped in a busy area.

From 2017 to 2019, the committee conducted confidential, on-camera interviews with men and women across various roles in the Malayalam film industry, known as ‘Mollywood.’ To gain firsthand insight into the working conditions for women, committee members also visited the set of the 2019 film Lucifer. Despite the committee’s extensive investigation, the report was delayed by five years before finally being released.

In December 2019, they had submitted the findings to the Kerala Government but the report was not made public for so long. On July 6, 2024, the State Information Commission (SIC) passed an order directing the Kerala government to issue the committee report to RTI applicants before July 2, 2024 after redacting information that could identify individuals mentioned in the report, as prohibited under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. Petitions seeking were the stay of the publication were then moved in the Kerala High Court, which further delayed the publication.

On August 19, 2024 earlier on the day of its publication, the Kerala High Court had dismissed a plea by actor Ranjini, who sought to block the report’s release. The report, now public, unveils disturbing practices within the industry, such as the prevalence of “compromise” and “adjustment,” terms used to pressure women into sexual encounters in exchange for roles. It also highlights the control exerted by a powerful group of 10-15 key individuals in Mollywood, who can effectively blacklist anyone who defies them. The committee found that the experiences of many women in the industry were so traumatic that they hadn’t even shared them with close family members. The report paints a grim picture of an industry plagued by coercion, lack of basic facilities like toilets and changing rooms, and a power structure that stifles dissent. It is essential to note that the report had been published after removing 63 pages from the 295-page document that could compromise individuals’ privacy.

What does the report entail?

Women who came forward to the Justice Hema Committee shared that harassment in the Malayalam film industry often begins at the very first step—when seeking work. . The report underscores that harassment begins as soon as a woman seeks a role in the industry, with insiders perpetuating the idea that successful women are those who are willing to make compromises. Typically, a woman’s entry into the industry is facilitated by a production controller or an insider offering her a role.

The report specifically states that the women who spoke to the Committee highlighted a significant difference between sexual harassment in the film industry and other sectors. As per them, this distinction lies in the fact that an aspiring female actor’s very entry into the profession often hinges on her willingness to comply with sexual demands. This fundamental issue sets the film industry apart, making the harassment within it particularly pervasive and damaging.

A culture of compromise and control: The report provides that the Mollywood industry operates on a system of “compromise” and “adjustment,” where women are often expected to trade sexual favours for roles or career advancement. These terms, familiar to most of the women in the industry, are euphemisms for being expected to be available for sex on demand, as the report reveals. One survivor recounted that this “demand for sex” could come from anyone in the industry—whether an actor, producer, director, or production controller. The report notably refers to this survivor as a “girl,” suggesting that she might have been a minor at the time. The “girl” was told that in order to secure an opportunity in the industry, she too would need to make such “adjustments” and “compromises.” The report further highlights that aspiring female actors are often manipulated into sexual exploitation, being misled into believing that successful women in the industry achieved their status only by agreeing to such demands. Tragically, by the time many women realize they have been trapped, it is often too late to escape.

Unsafe working conditions: The committee also found that women working in the Malayalam film industry are often denied basic amenities like toilets and changing rooms on set, especially during outdoor shoots. Women are forced to find secluded places, like forests or behind bushes, to relieve themselves, sometimes changing under the cover of a cloth held by others. This lack of facilities often leads women to avoid drinking water to prevent the need to relieve themselves, which can cause physical ailments. This issue affects not only actresses but also junior artists and support staff like stylists. Despite the prevalence of these problems, caravans are only provided for the exclusive use of leading actresses.

Closed doors and continuing silence: The report uncovers the deeply ingrained male dominance in the Malayalam film industry, often referred to as a “Boys’ Club.” This culture manifests with late-night gatherings where men discuss scripts and upcoming projects, frequently over drinks. The report shows how these meetings often drift from professional matters into crude jokes with sexual overtones, reflecting the pervasive masculinity within the industry.

The report also emphasises upon the pressure that women within the industry faced, forcing them to keep silent about the harassment they were facing. As per the report, despite their courage, many women were hesitant to reveal their experiences of harassment. Their reluctance stems from two primary fears. First, they worry that speaking out could result in being blacklisted from the industry and subjected to further harassment, as the powerful figures involved are likely to be shielded by their male peers. Second, they fear online harassment, knowing that influential men in the industry might deploy their fan clubs to launch vicious attacks against them, using vulgar language and explicit content to demean and silence them.

Some women even faced threats to their safety or that of their families, contributing to a culture of silence. The report emphasizes that this silence is maintained by a “fear psychosis” fuelled by the power dynamics within the industry. Witnesses reported to that committee that no one dares to challenge these powerful men, as doing so could lead to being labelled a “troublemaker” and losing future work opportunities. The report also highlights an “unwritten rule” in the industry that those who confront misconduct and fight for their rights are often ostracized.

Blatant demands and expectations of sexual favours: As per the report, many women who spoke to the committee revealed that a prevalent attitude among men in the film industry is the assumption that women who agree to perform intimate scenes on screen are equally willing to engage in similar behaviour off-screen. As a result, these men often make blatant sexual demands, showing little hesitation or embarrassment.

Even when women voice their discomfort and reject these advances, the report indicates that the men often persist, promising “more chances” in films as a form of coercion. This predatory behaviour particularly targets newcomers, some of whom, according to the committee, end up being sexually exploited. The committee was also provided with various forms of digital evidence, including audio recordings, video clips, and screenshots of WhatsApp messages, all of which demonstrated how certain individuals in the industry manipulated women into sexual encounters.

Not isolated incidents: The report states that the prevailing culture in Mollywood deters many women for whom working in cinema has been a lifelong passion, a dream finally within reach. However, the exploitation they face has led some to turn down offers they might otherwise have accepted.

The report also negated the claims made by a few men to the committee which stated that women only encounter these issues when they respond to “fake advertisements.” It was the committee’s analysis of the evidence confirmed that sexual harassment occurs even at the hands of “very well-known people in the film industry,” who were named during the proceedings.

Although the report redacted specific details of these instances, it did recount one woman’s traumatic experience on a film set following such an incident. The day after she was harassed, she had to perform scenes with the same man, portraying a married couple embracing each other. Her anger and resentment, a result of the assault, were evident in her expression during filming, leading to seventeen retakes for a single shot. The director criticized her for this, highlighting the emotional toll of such exploitation.

Unsafety during outdoors shoots, forcing women asking parents or relatives to accompany: Women interviewed by the Committee revealed that they often bring parents or relatives to film sets due to the pervasive fear of sexual exploitation. This fear is particularly pronounced during outstation shoots, where accommodations are provided far from home.

The report notes that in many of these hotels, intoxicated men from the film industry frequently knock on the women’s doors late at night. These knocks are not gentle or courteous but rather forceful and persistent, causing the women to fear that the door might eventually give way and that the men would forcibly enter their rooms. This troubling behaviour has made many women feel unsafe staying alone in these accommodations.

Lack of redressal mechanism: The report showed that this enforced silence is not just cultural but structural. The Committee discovered that women have endured harassment since the industry’s inception, yet there has never been a formal grievance redressal system. In rare cases when a woman does report harassment to a producer, the accused actor or director is often retained if they are considered financially valuable, prioritizing profits over justice.

One witness described how, when a woman reports harassment by a director to her colleagues, she is typically advised to stay silent and “compromise” for the sake of the film. In contrast, male superstars, directors, and producers often act without consequence, protected by their status and influence.

The report also recounts a particularly distressing experience of a female actor cast in a lead role. During initial discussions, the director mentioned an intimate scene but withheld specific details despite her repeated inquiries. He assured her that nothing would occur without her consent. However, after three months of preparation, the director revealed that the scene would involve nudity and a kiss, leaving her feeling coerced into performing it. She ultimately walked away from the project without claiming her pay, sending a message to the director expressing her loss of trust. The director then threatened to retain the intimate scenes unless she personally travelled to Kochi. The report underscores the need for a formal redressal mechanism, noting that a written contract could have prevented this situation.

Before the establishment of the Women in Cinema Collective (WCC), fear kept stories of abuse hidden even among women. The WCC created a confidential WhatsApp group, providing a safe space for women to discuss their concerns and share their experiences of sexual harassment—stories they often felt unable to disclose even to their families. Many women’s families were already hesitant to support their careers in an industry notorious for mistreating women, making the WCC an essential platform for addressing these long-standing issues.

The power nexus and its consequences: The report further points to the existence of a powerful group of producers, directors, and actors who exert significant control over the industry. This group, described as a “criminal gang,” can blacklist or ban individuals who refuse to comply with their demands. As per the report, this group controls the industry with an iron fist, often resorting to blacklisting or banning those who do not conform to their rules. These bans are typically enforced through secret, unwritten agreements, making it difficult for those targeted to seek recourse. The report suggests that even outspoken women in the industry hesitate to reveal their experiences of harassment, fearing that they will be subjected to online harassment or even physical threats.

However, the committee report also acknowledges that not all men in the Malayalam film industry contribute to its negative reputation, and that the evidence suggests that several “highly respectable men” have played a role in creating a safer environment for women. While specific names were redacted in the report, it did mention a cinematographer and a director as examples of those who upheld professional integrity. However, the report also notes that some men attempted to downplay the issue of sexual harassment by arguing that it is not unique to the film industry and occurs in other fields as well. They suggested that the problem in cinema should not be exaggerated. 

Recommendations for Reform

The revelations from the Justice Hema Committee report have triggered widespread concern and discussion, exposing a disturbing culture of exploitation, gender inequality, and abuse of power in the Malayalam film industry. The findings highlight an urgent need for systemic reforms to protect the rights and dignity of women working within this sector.

The committee identified at least 17 different forms of exploitation faced by women across 30 categories of work in the industry. These include sexual demands made toward women trying to enter the field, incidents of sexual harassment, and various forms of abuse and assault. Additionally, the report draws attention to issues related to transportation and accommodation, which further contribute to an unsafe working environment for women.

In response to these findings, the committee has recommended the creation of an independent tribunal to specifically address cases of harassment and exploitation within the industry. This tribunal, to be chaired by a retired district judge, would have the authority to impose penalties on those found guilty of harassment, denial of basic amenities, or other forms of mistreatment. The committee also emphasizes the need for mandatory formal working contracts for all industry personnel, including junior artists, to ensure transparency in payment and working conditions.

Related:

Caste and Indifference: Two separate incidents of rape against minor Dalit girls in UP and Bihar receive no media coverage, protest or outrage

India’s cry for justice: The brutal Kolkata rape-murder of a young doctor has ignited nationwide protests on the eve of the 78th Independence’s Day

India’s flawed rape laws: a betrayal of equality

Minor Dalit girl gang raped after promise of marriage

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

The post The illusion of the glamourous Malayalam cinema falls apart: Justice Hema Committee report provides insight into systematic harassment and exploitation of women actors appeared first on SabrangIndia.

As the country takes to the streets in justified fury over the horrific rape and murder of a 31-year-old woman doctor at Kolkata’s RG Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9, 2024, two recent cases of rape involving minor Dalit girls in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar have been met with a deafening silence. These brutal crimes, reported after the Kolkata tragedy, have failed to ignite the same level of public outrage.

This glaring disparity forces us to confront a disturbing truth: Where is the outrage when the victims are Dalit women? Why is their suffering met with indifference? This is a shameful reflection of how deeply entrenched casteism and discrimination remain in our society.

Bihar: Minor Dalit girl abducted, gang-raped and killed

An unprecedented low in Bihar’s deteriorating law and order situation was reportedly reached when a 14-year-old Dalit girl was kidnapped from her home, gang-raped, and killed in the Muzaffarpur district. The girl, a Class IX dropout, was forcibly taken away on the night of August 11 from her house in Paroo police station area in the presence of her parents. On the morning of August 12, a Monday, her body was discovered in a pond, partially nude. Her body was covered in several wounds and bloodstains, and she had her mouth taped shut.

Speaking to the media, the girl’s mother spoke about the incident by stating “Five persons, including a person called Sanjay Rai, abducted my daughter on Sunday night threatening to rape her. We could do nothing out of fear. We found her body next morning in a pond outside our village”. The mother of the minor deceased girl said that accused Rai, who was already married, had been harassing her daughter to get married to him. “He threatened to kill her when we refused,” she said.

Satyahindi.com carried reports of the murder-rape in Muzaffarpur rightly focussing on it along with the Bengal crime.

A 14-year-old #Dalit girl was allegedly abducted from her house, gang-raped and killed in #Muzaffarpur district, marking a new low in the deteriorating law and order situation in #Bihar.

The girl, a Class IX dropout, was forcibly taken away on Sunday night from her house in… pic.twitter.com/TagrRklWUk

— Hate Detector (@HateDetectors) August 15, 2024

The enraged locals have threatened to stage a protest at the Paroo police station and use road blockades in the event that the offenders are not apprehended promptly. As per the information provided on social media, an FIR has been registered against the five accused. As per the media coverage, Muzaffarpur senior superintendent of police Rakesh Kumar has stated that “Injuries from a sharp weapon have been found on the dead girl’s neck, head and palms. We have collected evidence with the help of a forensic team and the dog squad. A khurpi (small gardening spade) used in the murder has been recovered. Raids are being conducted to arrest the accused”. The police said they would not be able to confirm the gang rape till they received the post-mortem report.

It is essential to note that no mainstream media has covered this news.

Minor Dalit girl raped by government official

On August 12, a 57-year-old government official was arrested for allegedly raping a 6-year-old Dalit girl in her home in Bulandshahr, Uttar Pradesh. The accused, Gajendra Singh, who served as an Agriculture Development Officer, has been arrested and suspended from his position.

The rape has been alleged to have taken place when the parents of the victims were not at home. The accused took advantage of the absence of adults, and allegedly entered the victim’s home while she was playing with a neighbour’s child. The neighbour’s child recorded the horrific act on their mobile phone. As per a report of Maktoob Media, the victim’s father, who is a Dalit farmer, narrated the incident by providing that “My daughter, who opened the door, told him not to come in as there was no one else in the house. The kid goat was tied to a pole. The incident took place around 5 pm. Singh had visited our house previously for work. On Monday, he didn’t listen to my daughter and instead sat down on the charpai.”

The Dalit farmer “My daughter will never be able to live a normal life now? He (accused) should be given the strictest punishment,” he added.

A complaint was filed with the police the following morning. The accused is charged with sexually assaulting the minor girl and then engaging in bestiality with a goat on the property. According to police, Singh has been charged under several serious laws based on the complaint filed. These include the SC/ST Atrocities Prevention Act, the POCSO Act, Section 65(2) of the Indian Penal Code (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita), and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.

After the incident came to light, the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Yogi Adityanath, took serious cognizance of the matter and accused official has been suspended, and a departmental inquiry has been initiated. Additionally, the state government has announced financial assistance of 8.25 lakh for the victim’s family under various schemes.

The Maktoob Media report states that the Chief Minister has directed the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) of Bulandshahr and the District Magistrate to visit the village, offer support to the victim’s family, and oversee the investigation.

It is crucial to note that the victim is currently stable and undergoing medical examinations. Speaking to the media, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Shlok Kumar, has confirmed the arrest of the accused and stated that a thorough investigation is underway.

No outrage on sexual violence against Dalit women?

Violence against Dalit women often remain underreported in mainstream media due to deeply entrenched caste biases and systemic discrimination in society. The media in India, which is often dominated by upper-caste narratives, tends to marginalise issues affecting the Dalit community. This bias is compounded by a lack of representation of Dalits in media organisations, which leads to a skewed focus on issues affecting more privileged groups. As a result, the horrific violence faced by Dalit women is frequently overlooked or minimised, failing to receive the attention it deserves. This exclusion from mainstream discourse perpetuates their vulnerability and invisibility.

The absence of widespread protests against violence targeting Dalit women is closely tied to the caste-based social hierarchy that continues to shape societal responses to injustice. In many cases, the dominant caste groups have significant influence over political and social institutions, including law enforcement, which discourages or suppresses public outcry. Additionally, there is often a lack of solidarity from other marginalised groups, who might not fully recognise the intersecting oppressions faced by Dalit women. The pervasive apathy and normalisation of caste-based violence create an environment where atrocities against Dalit women are met with silence rather than the collective outrage that might be seen in cases involving more socially privileged groups.

Related:

India’s cry for justice: The brutal Kolkata rape-murder of a young doctor has ignited nationwide protests on the eve of the 78th Independence’s Day

India’s flawed rape laws: a betrayal of equality

Horrifying instances of rape in MP and Mahrashtra, accused booked under POCSO

The post Caste and Indifference: Two separate incidents of rape against minor Dalit girls in UP and Bihar receive no media coverage, protest or outrage appeared first on SabrangIndia.