Satyaki was testifying in a Pune Court and made this disclosure in his cross-examination before Special Judge Amol Shinde; who is presently dealing with the criminal defamation case he has filed against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi for allegedly defaming his grand uncle in a speech in London.

Leader of the Opposition (LOP) Rahul Gandhi’s counsel Milind Pawar is presently cross-examining Satyaki in the trial. In his testimony, Satyaki on Monday stated that his granduncle was labelled as a ‘Veer’ in a periodical run by the Gadar Organisation even before he was sent to the Andaman.

“It is true to say that, Savarkar had filed a clemency petition ten times. It is true to say that, he was referred to as a ‘Veer’ when the clemency petition was filed. It is true to say that, Savarkar was referred to as ‘Veer’ even when he submitted clemency petitions ten times. It is not true to say that, it is a contradiction to call someone a ‘Veer’ who has filed a clemency petition ten times. It is true to say that, revolutionists from that same period— Rajguru, Batukeshwar Dutt, and Ashfaqulla Khan— did not file a clemency petition. It is true to say that, Savarkar filed a mercy petition within the first month after being sentenced. I was unaware that Bhagat Singh and Batukeshwar Dutt had petitioned the British government, demanding to be treated as prisoners of war and refusing any concessions or acts of leniency. It is true to say that, Bhagat Singh and Batukeshwar Dutt remained steadfast in their ideology and principles until the very end. I am aware that revolutionist Bhagat Singh and Batukeshwar Dutt did not compromise on their principles and ideologies in their dealings with the British right to the end,” Satyaki told the court.

Further, Satyaki also told the court that the records pertaining to the 10 mercy or clemency petitions filed by Savarkar are kept in the official government records. He added that the language in these mercy petitions filed by Savarkar did not indicate his ‘loyalty’ to the British regime.

“These clemency petitions used to be forwarded by the prison administration to the British government for approval. It is true to say that the British government had the authority to commute or alter the sentences in any mercy petitions that were submitted. It is true to say that, the authority to reduce or remit a sentence depended on the policy and procedure of the British government. It is true to say that, Savarkar’s clemency petitions are available in government records. It is true to say that, these petitions exist and that I have not filed them,” the testimony reads.

Satyaki has further stated that the British government rejected all of Savarkar’s clemency petitions and in their replies, expressed the apprehension that if Savarkar were released, he would once again participate in the revolutionary movement, leading to the end of British rule.

“It is true to say that, filing a clemency petition to seek a reduction in the sentence was a standard procedure under the British government. It is true to say that, not only Savarkar but other prisoners also filed clemency petitions. It is true to say that, filing a clemency petition was neither exceptional nor illegal. It is not true to say that the language Savarkar used in that clemency petition was one of humility. It is not true to say that the petitions contained words expressing loyalty to the British government. It is true to say that, in that petition, Savarkar requested a reduction of his sentence,” the complainant Satyaki said.

In his testimony, Satyaki further stated that the language Savarkar used in the clemency petitions was in keeping with official protocol. He also opined that the reason revolutionists took up arms was the injustice perpetrated by the British and that Savarkar had expressed the view that had the British implemented reforms earlier, the revolutionists would not have resorted to arms.

During the ongoing proceedings, the Pune court has recorded the excerpts from one of the mercy petitions filed by Savarkar, stating that others sent to the Andaman jail along with him were released but he was not and instead was classified as a Class D prisoner and was subjected to harsh punishments.

“I am not aware that Savarkar signed every petition with the text: ‘I beg to remain, Sir, your most obedient servant, V.D. Savarkar.’ It is not true to say that the process of Savarkar’s release began after these ten petitions were filed. I do not have a report available that makes a comparative study of the mercy petitions filed by Savarkar and those filed by other prisoners, as well as their contents. It is true to say that, filing a mercy petition is an official procedure intended to seek a reduction in the sentence, and Savarkar availed himself of this very process. There is no expert report available to demonstrate that the content and language of Savarkar’s mercy petition were merely formal or part of his strategy,” Satyaki further added to his testimony LiveLaw stated.

Further, Satyaki stated, “It is true to say that, no prisoner was under any obligation to submit a mercy petition. It is true to say that, whether or not to file a mercy petition depended on the preference of the concerned prisoner. It is true to say that, these revolutionists endured great hardships; however, I do not know the names of the specific prisoners among them who filed mercy petitions.”

Satyaki’s cross-examination will continue on July 1.

Background:

The defamation complaint asserts that Gandhi has repeatedly defamed Savarkar on various occasions over the years. One specific incident highlighted was on March 5, 2023, when Gandhi addressed the Overseas Congress in the United Kingdom. The complainant, who testified yesterday, Satyaki Savarkar, has claimed that Gandhi intentionally made wild allegations against Savarkar, knowing them to be untrue, with the intention of harming Savarkar’s reputation and causing mental agony to the complainant and his family. He states that the defamatory speech was delivered in England, but its impact was felt in Pune as it was published and circulated throughout India.

Satyaki, in his complaint, has submitted several news reports and a YouTube link to a video of Gandhi’s speech in London as evidence. He has claimed that Gandhi falsely accused Savarkar of writing a book in which he described beating up a Muslim person, which Savarkar never wrote and such an incident never happened.

Satyaki argued that Gandhi made these false, malicious, and wild allegations with the specific objective of defaming Savarkar and harming his reputation. The criminal defamation application filed by Satyaki demands maximum punishment for Gandhi under Section 500 (Punishment for defamation) of the IPC and seeks imposition of maximum compensation as per Section 357 (Order to pay compensation) of the CrPC.

SabrangIndia has carried multiple analyses and reports of Savarkar and how his attitudes could be dubbed as casteist. These may be read here and here.

Related:

Savarkar and the Making of Hindutva: Book Review

Savarkar’s grandson calls for trade boycott of Muslims: HJS, GOA

Teaser of Film on Savarkar: Lies Galore

The post Yes, Savarkar did file 10 Mercy Petitions before the British, revolutionaries like Bhagat Singh refused to Compromise: Grandnephew tells Pune Court appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The judgment, delivered on June 12, 2026 by First Additional Sessions Judge Tabassum Khan, found Deepak alias Baba Kevat, Ajay alias Ajju Rathore, Prakash Kaushal, Pawan Batham, Amar alias Bhola Batham, Kanhaiya Batham and Ballu alias Anuj Raghuvanshi guilty of offences under Sections 148 (rioting armed with deadly weapons), 307 read with 149 (attempt to murder with common object) and 302 read with 149 (murder with common object) of the Indian Penal Code.

At the sentencing stage, the Court made a particularly noteworthy observation, recording that the prosecution had successfully established that the accused had committed mob lynching. The Court identified several aggravating circumstances, including the formation of an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons, the extreme brutality inflicted upon the victims, the fatal injuries suffered by Najir Ahmed, and the injuries caused to the surviving victims.

Background: Attack on cattle transporters

According to the prosecution case, on the intervening night of August 2 and 3, 2022, truck driver Sheikh Lala was transporting cattle along with Najir Ahmed and Sheikh Mustaq from Nandarwada towards Maharashtra. Around 12:30 a.m., when their vehicle reached near Barakhad village in Seoni Malwa, a group of villagers intercepted the truck.

The occupants were allegedly dragged out and assaulted with lathis and wooden sticks. All three men sustained injuries. Najir Ahmed suffered severe head and bodily injuries and later died during treatment. Sheikh Lala and Sheikh Mustaq survived but sustained serious injuries.

Following the incident, police registered an FIR initially against unknown persons under provisions relating to rioting, wrongful restraint, attempt to murder and murder. During the investigation, officers collected physical evidence from the scene, including bloodstained soil and weapons, recorded witness statements, secured medical records, and obtained the dying declarations of the injured survivors.

Evidence relied upon by the court

The Court’s findings rested upon a combination of eyewitness testimony, medical evidence, forensic examination and recoveries made during the investigation.

The two surviving victims, Sheikh Lala and Sheikh Mustaq, consistently stated that a crowd had stopped their vehicle and assaulted them. Their accounts were corroborated by medical evidence documenting multiple injuries sustained during the attack.

Medical records showed that Najir Ahmed was brought to hospital in a critical and unconscious condition. Doctors noted extensive injuries, including swelling on the face and head, lacerated wounds, contusions and severe trauma. The post-mortem examination revealed multiple external and internal injuries, including skull fractures and significant head trauma.

“Arguments have been presented by the learned counsel for the accused persons that in the P.M. report (Ex. P–68–C) of the deceased Nazir, the cause of death is recorded as asphyxiation due to vomit blocking the throat, which makes it clear that the death of the deceased Nazir did not occur due to the injuries sustained by him. In this context, it is observable that although Dr. Shekhar Raghuvanshi (PW–22) admitted in paragraph 14 of his cross-examination that his opinion was given to the effect that his death occurred due to asphyxiation caused by vomit blocking the throat of deceased Nazir Ahmed, he made no statement to the effect that the injuries sustained by the deceased were insufficient to cause death, nor was any such suggestion given to the said doctor by the defense. From the aforementioned P.M. report (Ex. P–68–C), it is proved that the deceased sustained external and internal injuries, and it is also clear from the evidence of Dr. Shekhar Raghuvanshi (PW–22) that the deceased was brought in an unconscious state, his condition was highly critical, and his oxygen level as well as B.P. were unrecordable; thus, this argument of the defense is not acceptable that the death of the deceased did not occur due to the injuries sustained by him.” (Para 22) (Paragraph translated from Hindi to English)

The defence attempted to argue that Najir Ahmed’s death was caused by asphyxiation due to choking on vomit rather than by injuries sustained during the assault. The Court rejected this contention. It held that although the post-mortem referred to choking as the immediate mechanism of death, the evidence clearly established that Najir Ahmed had been brought to hospital in a grievously injured and unconscious state after the assault. The Court found that the fatal sequence of events was directly attributable to the brutal attack and that the injuries inflicted by the accused could not be separated from the death that followed.

The Court further relied on forensic evidence. Blood-stained weapons, clothing and other articles seized during the investigation were subjected to forensic examination. Human blood was detected on several seized items, including articles recovered from the accused and the deceased’s clothing. The Court noted that the accused failed to offer any satisfactory explanation for the presence of human blood on the recovered materials.

“According to the F.S.L. report Ex. P–103, Benzidine/Phenolphthalein and Crystal tests were performed on the said exhibits. According to the said report, human blood was found on A, B, C, D, E, F, $G_1$, $G_2$, I, K, $N_1$, and $N_2$. According to the said report, the stains on H, J, L, and M were disintegrated. In this manner, on the basis of the aforementioned F.S.L. report Ex. P–103, the presence of human blood on the aforementioned items seized from the accused persons is confirmed.” (Para 78) (Paragraph translated from Hindi to English)

“In the present case, blood-stained items were seized directly from the houses under the possession of the accused persons, on which human blood was found. The seizure proceedings have been duly proved by the prosecution, and according to the F.S.L. report, the chain of custody of the seized exhibits also remained intact. The police station daily log entry (Rojnamcha Sanha) of the proceedings from the date of the incident has also been produced. Under these circumstances, the burden of proof to provide an explanation was upon the accused persons, which was not given. Therefore, the aforementioned legal precedents are not applicable to the present case.” (Para 84) (Paragraph translated from Hindi to English)

Common object and unlawful assembly

A central issue before the Court was whether the accused could be held collectively liable for murder under Sections 302 and 149 IPC.

After evaluating the evidence, the Court concluded that the accused had formed; an unlawful assembly armed with lathis and dandas and had acted in furtherance of a common object. The attack was neither spontaneous nor isolated. Rather, the group acted collectively, used force and violence, and jointly assaulted the victims.

The Court held that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused, acting as members of an unlawful assembly, intentionally assaulted Najir Ahmed with sticks and clubs in a manner that was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. It further found that the assaults on Sheikh Lala and Sheikh Mustaq amounted to an attempt to murder.

“An observation of all the circumstances available on the record establishes the involvement of the accused persons and that the death of the deceased Nazir Ahmed was caused due to the assault. Both the other injured victims, Shekh Lala and Sayyad Mushtaq, were also present along with the deceased. It stands proved that injuries were caused to the injured Shekh Lala on the neck and chest, and to the injured Sayyad Mushtaq on the head, arm, and other vital parts. Therefore, looking at the weapons used by the accused persons, the nature of the injuries of the injured victims, and the facts and circumstances leading to the death of their other companion Nazir Ahmed, the intention of the accused persons to commit murder can be inferred.” (Para 93) (Paragraph translated from Hindi to English)

In one of the key findings of the judgment, the Court observed that the accused, armed with deadly weapons, had formed an unlawful assembly, committed rioting and, in prosecution of their common object, murdered Najir Ahmed while attempting to murder the two surviving victims.

Court recognises mob lynching as an aggravating circumstance

The sentencing portion of the judgment is particularly significant because the Court expressly characterised the crime as a case of mob lynching. While considering punishment, Judge Tabassum Khan identified the following aggravating factors:

• The prosecution had proved that the accused committed mob lynching.
• The accused formed an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons and engaged in rioting.
• The assault was carried out with exceptional brutality.
• Najir Ahmed suffered extensive injuries that resulted in his death.
• The attack also caused serious injuries to other victims.

The Court observed that the violence inflicted upon the victims reflected a high degree of brutality and collective criminality, warranting severe punishment.

Why the court rejected the death penalty

Despite finding the accused guilty of murder in a mob-lynching incident, the Court declined to impose capital punishment. Relying upon the established “rarest of rare” doctrine governing death penalty cases, the Court held that the circumstances did not justify the imposition of the death sentence. Instead, it sentenced all seven convicts to imprisonment for life under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC.

“For murder, there is a provision up to the death penalty, but in the legal precedent Bachan Singh Versus State of Punjab A.I.R. 1980 S.C. 898, it has been held by the Honorable Supreme Court that the death penalty should be awarded only in the “rarest of rare cases”. In the legal precedent Santosh Kumar Singh Versus State through C.B.I. (2010) 9 SCC 747, it has also been opined that when the court has to choose an alternative between life imprisonment and the death penalty, the option of life imprisonment should generally be chosen, unless there are such exceptional circumstances that make the death penalty inevitable. In this regard, the legal precedent Machi Singh Versus State of Punjab (1983) 3 SCC 470 is also followed.” (Para 102) (Paragraph translated from Hindi to English)

The convicts were also sentenced to ten years’ rigorous imprisonment under Section 307 read with Section 149 IPC for the attempted murder of the surviving victims, and three years’ rigorous imprisonment under Section 148 IPC for rioting while armed with deadly weapons. Fines were additionally imposed.

Significance of the judgment

The judgment stands out for two reasons. First, it represents a rare instance where a trial court has explicitly described the offence as mob lynching and treated that finding as a distinct aggravating circumstance while determining punishment. Second, the Court’s reasoning underscores the application of collective liability principles under Section 149 IPC to vigilante violence carried out by groups acting in concert.

At a time when incidents of violence linked to allegations of cattle transportation and cow smuggling continue to generate legal and constitutional concerns, the ruling sends a clear message that vigilante groups cannot substitute themselves for law enforcement and that collective violence resulting in death will attract the gravest criminal consequences under the law.

The complete judgment may be read below:

Related:

Mob lynching: Three separate incidents surface, even minors and partially disabled Muslims not safe

Another cow lynching in Nashik, one dead

Maharashtra’s shame: Cow lynching episode reported in Nashik

Allahabad HC points out misuse of cow slaughter law

K’taka: Bail to cow vigilante, Puneeth Kerehalli, accused of killing Muslim man

Cow vigilantism casts its ugly shadow on Maharashtra

Allahabad HC calls out misuse of law in cow slaughter case as only cow dung recovered from scene

The post Court recognises mob lynching as aggravating factor, sentences seven to life for 2022 cow-vigilantism killing appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The protesters foot march happened days after the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), which protects the mosque, wrote to the district administration to not allow any “large gathering” on June 10, even as the campaign was building up. However, under the banner of temple Shri Chakradhar Swami National Heritage Conservation Committee and several Jain organisations, a march was organised from Hostel ground to the district collectorate, covering nearly a kilometre.

Apart from Gujaratis, several followers of Chakradhar Swami from Amravati and other districts in Maharashtra participated along with local residents, holding placards and banners. Among the participants was Bhavesh Patel, who was released on bail after his conviction in the Ajmer Dargah blast case of 2007 investigated by the National Investigation Agency. Patel had by then become a self-styled godman, assuming the name of “Swami Muktanand” reported Indian Express.

Protesters handed a memorandum to Bharuch Collector Navnath Gavhane and demanded preservation of the monument to its original structure. The memorandum states that a drive was carried out to create public awareness in Gujarat and Maharashtra by the followers of Chakradhar Swami from May 18-23. Signatures of over 35,000 were taken, along with their mobile phone numbers.

Muktanand Swami alias Bhavesh Patel of Bharuch said, “The Jama Masjid has its origin in the birthplace of an ancient Jain temple, and the birthplace of Swami Chakradhar of Maharashtra. The Islamic rulers had converted the monument into a mosque. The Masjid is presently under the possession of the ASI. We have come to know that the rules and regulations of the ASI are not followed, as some people are involved in making changes in the existing structure. Actions should be taken against those who are involved in alterations or changes made to the historically protected monument.”

Quick to set the record straight, however Bharuch district collector Dr. Navnath Gavhane said, “There is no law-and-order situation. District Superintendent of Police, District magistrate office and ASI (Archaeological Survey of India) officials are maintaining it. We have appealed to people to refrain from making any generalised comments about the monument or believing in rumours and misunderstandings. The ASI is a competent authority to decide about the monument.”

Over the past decades, far right groups have been consistently mobilising to “re-claim” Mosques and Dargahs in campaigns that threaten the cultural and religious rights of the religious minority.

Related:

ASI, Gujarat: Will Bharuch’s 700 year old Jama Masjid be the next target of right-wing saffron grab and terror?

Bhojshala Judgment: MP High Court declares Dhar site a Saraswati Temple, ends Namaz rights at complex

The post Despite ASI’s warning protesters in Bharuch march to collector to ‘preserve original identity’ of Bharuch mosque appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Census as a Fundamental Rights Instrument

Further, PUCL points out that “the Census is not merely a bureaucratic exercise in counting heads and tabulating assets. The Indian State fulfils its constitutional obligations to its citizens through the foundational instrument. The data collected determines the allocation of welfare entitlements, targeted poverty programmes, infrastructure investments, and, crucially, delimitation of parliamentary constituencies. The Census is therefore inseparable from the right to equality (Article 14), the right to life and dignity (Article 21), and the right of citizens to be counted truthfully as bearers of rights. To falsify Census data is not an administrative irregularity: it is a violation of fundamental rights,” the statement states.

The Ground Reality

The testimony of enumerators, government school teachers, anganwadi workers, and other frontline functionaries paints a picture of deprivation that is profoundly at odds with the government’s self-congratulatory claims.

Enumerators across Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh have reported:
– Households without toilets, where residents defecate in the open, contradicting the government’s declaration that India is Open Defecation Free (ODF).
– Households without piped or treated tap water, contradicting the Jal Jeevan Mission’s claim of near-universal household water connectivity.
– Households dependent on firewood, dung cakes, and kerosene for cooking, contradicting data on LPG connections under the Ujjwala scheme.
– Households with tin roofs being instructed to be reclassified as having concrete roofs, a naked falsification of housing conditions.
– Households without electricity or internet, contradicting claims of digital inclusion.
– Residents so impoverished and excluded from state welfare that they pleaded with enumerators to help them access basic entitlements, housing, LPG, water, pensions, that they had never received despite being counted as beneficiaries in government data.

These are not discrepancies in methodology. They are the face of structural deprivation of a welfare architecture that has been constructed on paper while millions remain without its basic provisions in reality.

The Direction to Falsify: A Grave Institutional Offence

PUCL Rajasthan draws particular attention to the letter issued on June 2, 2026 by the Director of Census Operations, Rajasthan, to all district-level functionaries, directing them to ‘verify’ and correct ‘discrepancies’. Read alongside the testimony of enumerators who have been explicitly told ‘not to select options that may show the government in a poor light’, this letter constitutes institutional cover for data manipulation.

The instruction to enumerators to check whether households practising open defecation have access to a neighbour’s toilet or a public urinal, so as to revise the classification away from ‘open defecation’, is particularly egregious. It is not enumeration; it is the manufacture of consent to a falsehood.

This is not the first time that official welfare data has been found to diverge sharply from ground realities. The SIR exercise, deletions from voter rolls, manipulated BPL lists, these form part of a consistent and dangerous pattern of state-manufactured invisibility of the poor. The Census, which carries unique constitutional weight and long-term demographic and electoral consequences, cannot be permitted to become another instrument in this edifice of official falsification.

The Vulnerability of Enumerators

PUCL states, “It is equally alarmed at the position in which frontline enumerators, government school teachers, anganwadi workers, and other contractual and regular state employees, have been placed. These individuals are being required to choose between their professional integrity and their institutional subordination. Many have raised their voices on social media at considerable personal risk. They deserve full protection, not coercion.”

The manner in which the Census exercise is being conducted entirely on digital platforms using enumerators’ personal phones, in conditions of inadequate mobile connectivity in rural and tribal areas, with grossly insufficient reimbursement (a mobile recharge of Rs. 66 has been reported from Uttarakhand) enhances this vulnerability, states PUCL.  These conditions, compounded by the simultaneous performance of regular duties, render the exercise not merely flawed but structurally compromised.

Warning

PUCL “reminds the Central and State Governments that a Census whose data is manufactured to validate governmental claims rather than to enumerate lived realities is not merely a statistical fraud, it is a political and constitutional one. The decennial Census shapes delimitation, welfare targeting, fiscal devolution, and the entire architecture of representative democracy. Falsified Census data will not only deprive the poor of entitlements they urgently need; it will corrupt the very basis of democratic representation for decades.

“The invisible poor, those without roofs, toilets, electricity, or clean water, have a fundamental right to be seen, counted, and heard by the Indian State. Their erasure from official data is not a technicality. It is a rights violation.

Hence, the organization demands:

– An immediate halt to all instructions, formal or informal, to enumerators to revise or ‘correct’ data that truthfully reflects ground conditions. The CMMS portal must not be used as an instrument of real-time surveillance to pressurise enumerators into data revision.
– A full, independent, and transparent inquiry into the letter issued by the Director of Census Operations, Rajasthan, on 2 June 2026, and all allied communications issued by Charge Officers, Sub-Divisional Census Officers, and District Coordinators in this connection.
– Guaranteed protection for all enumerators who have raised concerns about pressure to falsify data, whether on social media or through other means, against any form of institutional retaliation, transfer, or disciplinary action.
– The constitution of an independent oversight mechanism, including civil society, retired senior bureaucrats, and statisticians with no government affiliation, to audit and verify Census data at the block level before final records are compiled.
– A public statement from the Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India reaffirming the constitutional obligation of the Census to capture truthful ground realities, and explicitly disavowing any instruction to enumerators to align data with government welfare scheme claims.
– Adequate material support to enumerators, including data reimbursement, dedicated time, and relief from concurrent official duties during the HLO exercise.

The detailed statement has been issued by Kavita Srivastava, national president, V. Suresh, National General Secretary and Anant Bhatnagar, PUCL state Rajasthan President among others.

Related:

Ensure transparency and inclusion in the 2027 Census: CCG

Long-delayed Census to be Conducted in Two Phases From October 2026

To count or not to count, delays and India’s decadal Census

The post Falsifying the Truth: PUCL condemns the systematic manipulation of census data & suppression of ground realities in census exercise appeared first on SabrangIndia.

According to social media posts and wide reportage on the issue, Priyank Kharge in a letter (June 13, 2026) to RSS Supremo, Mohan Bhagwat sought details on the organisation’s legal status, finances, office-bearers and tax compliance. The State’s HM detailed that these details and actions were mandatory as the RSS officially claimed and had, over 60,000 shakhas and crores of swayamsevaks across India and abroad. Kharge outlined in his publicly released communication that this was not simply a legal requirement but also a moral issue. He wrote, “It is precisely because of this scale, influence and reach that the RSS must be held to the highest standards of transparency, accountability and constitutional compliance.”

Touching the nerve of every patriotic Indian, who has been battling this extra-constitutional authority and its functioning, Kharge stated, “An organisation that regularly evokes nationalism, discipline and duty must also demonstrate these values through transparency, compliance and respect for the Constitution of India. The RSS cannot ask ordinary Indians to follow rules while exempting itself from the same standards. If workers, small associations, religious institutions, NGOs, trusts, companies and citizens are expected to register, disclose, audit and pay taxes, then the RSS too must set an example by abiding by the rules of the land.”

No government in independent India has so far dared to confront RSS with these so many critical questions!

RSS supremo (Sarsanghchalak) Mohan Bhagwat’s reported response while on a tour of the southern state of Kerala was dismissive! Bhagwat while declaring that he did not “need to respond” to Kharge’s charges, went on to argue: “We are not secretive; we are working on open ground. We are calling people and telling them about us. This is politics, and all kinds of gimmicks are being tried… Hindu Dharma is not registered, and many other entities are not registered.”

However, the reality is this: the manner in which the Karnataka home minister has moved, the RSS will have to respond. Bhagwat’s plea that for “over 100 years, nobody told us to register” is not relevant: the RSS will have to “start preparing documents for registration” as stated by Kharge.

Meanwhile, a member of the RSS –also a a Hindutva bigot from Karnataka, Sudhir Bangera, 48, using filthy, derogatory, and casteist language against the home minister even threatened to kill him. “The time has come to finish you off”! The Facebook post from an account traced to Bangera said. The Times of India reported that Bangera had been arrested about a week ago when he used filthy casteist slurs and threatened to “finish off” Priyank Kharge! On X, Kharge shared a screenshot of Bangera’s post, where he allegedly abused the home minister and added, and “The time has come to finish you off.” Bangera was responding to a post on the Facebook page claiming that Kharge had said that as home minister, he would not allow the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) to spread communalism. “It hasn’t even been 48 hours since I assumed charge as Home Minister, you are already showing your fear, anxiety, and uneasiness,” Kharge said on X, tagging the state BJP. He accused the Opposition party of “using the RSS to insult me and issuing death threats”.

For decades now, since Independence, the RSS has been persistently resorting to the defence that, “The RSS is not a political party. It does not take part in elections nor its office bearers are supposed to become office bearers of any political party. The RSS has no election symbol nor its leadership or members have ever endeavoured to seek political office. It is a social-cultural organization trying to inspire all national activity.” [RSS English organ Organizer edit, February 6, 2000.)

The time has come, given HM Karnataka, Priyank Kharge’s campaign to compare this claim of the RSS with the following two statements of Golwalkar, who headed the RSS after the death of KB Hedgewar, and is considered the greatest ideologue of the organisation to date. The first statement tells us about the kind of personnel who are sent to manipulate politics and what is expected of them by the RSS.

While delivering a speech on March 16, 1954, in Sindi, Wardha, he said,

“If we say that we are part of the organization and accept its discipline then selectiveness has no place in life. Do what is told. If told to play kabaddi, play kabaddi; told to hold meeting then meeting….For instance some of our friends were told to go and work for politics that does not mean that they have great interest or inspiration for it. They don’t die for politics like fish without water. If they are told to withdraw from politics then also there is no objection. Their discretion is just not required.” 

[Golwalkar, MS, Shri Guruju Samgr Darshan (collected works of Golalkar in Hindi), Bhartiya Vichar Sadhna, Nagpur (RSS publication house), vol. III, n. d., p. 32.]

The second statement is also very significant and clearly highlights the high level of political ambitions of the RSS. While addressing the leading RSS cadres at Indore on March 5, 1960 Golwalkar had famously said:

“We know this also that some of our Swayamsevaks work in politics. There they have to organize according to the needs of work public meetings, processions etc., have to raise slogans. All these things have no place in our work. However, like the character in a play whatever role has been assigned should be portrayed with best of capability. But sometimes Swayamsevaks go beyond the role assigned to a performer (nat) as they develop over-zealousness in their hearts, to the extent that they become useless for this work. This is not good.”

[Ibid, vol. IV, pp. 4-5.]

The Nexus of the RSS made public by a publication of RSS

RSS is the only NGO in the world which claims it to be a cultural organisation but worships arms on its foundation day and runs a tentacle of organizations inimical to democratic-secular Indian polity.

The central publication house of the RSS, the Suruchi Prakashan, published a book, Param Vaibhav Ke Path Par (The Road to Eternal Glory) in 1997 giving details of more than 40 organizations created by the RSS for different tasks. Published in 1997 and 1999 (the author has a copy of the book but a book that disappeared from shelves of bookstores within months of the second edition published)

The preface of the book itself declares that,

“Without the knowledge of the different kinds of activities of the Sawyamsevaks (the volunteers of the RSS) the introduction of the RSS is incomplete. Keeping this in mind it has been attempted in this book to produce the brief information about the diverse activities of the Sawyamsevaks. This book covers the organizational status till 1996…We believe that this book will prove to be of use for those who want to understand the RSS with the Swyamsevaks.”

[Sapre, Sadanand D., Parm Vaibhav Ke Path Per, Suruchi (central publication house of RSS), Delhi, 1997, p. 7.]

The BJP as a political organization figures prominently in it, clubbed with the ABVP, Hindu Jagaran Manch, Vishva Hindu Parishad, Swadeshi Jagaran Manch and Sanskar Bharti. BJP figures at number 3 in the list of prominent organizations created by the RSS. This book gives details of the creation and development of Bhartiya Jan Sangh (the forerunner of the BJP) and then BJP by the RSS for purposes laid down by the latter. It is to be noted that PM of India and almost all ministers, BJP chief ministers and Governors publicly declare to be RSS cadres.

Sapre’s book, a document of the RSS and by the RSS can be the most crucial document needed to bell the cat, and ensure some accountability from this behemoth.

RSS & Conspiracies

A close reading of the above publication of the RSS shows how the organisation is run in a clandestine manner. It runs like a well-organised closed-door operation through its subsidiaries and satellites. There has always been a conscious attempt to create confusion about its different fronts which provide RSS with the opportunity to dissociate with any of these as per its convenience. For instance, it used Hindu Jagaran Manch (HJM) for “attacking Christians in late 1990s” and when public opinion, media and Parliament seemed to turn against it, RSS denied any relation with HJM. Whenever criminal activities of Vishwa Hindu Parishad, Bajrang Dal and ABVP are exposed, RSS declares that these are independent organizations. Interestingly, it was often seen mediating between the BJP lead government (1998-2004) and it’s these children.

It will be interesting –if and when the entire registration and disclosure takes place –to discover how many such and similar organisations have been similarly created in a secretive manner, characteristic of authoritarian and exclusivists outfits.

For instance, while giving the details of Hindu Jagaran Manch (HJM), the book says,

From the point of view of Hindu awakening this kind of forums (HJM) at present are active in 17 states with different names like ‘Hindu Manch’ in Delhi, ‘Hindu Munani’ in Tamilnadu, ‘Hinduekjut’ in Maharashtra. These are forums, not associations or organizations, that’s why it is not required to have membership, registration and elections.

[Sapre, Sadanand D., Param Vaibhav Ke Path Per, Suruchi, Delhi, 1997, p. 64.]

It is clear that these work as to avoid scrutiny by law and government. Such an organisational mode provides an opportunity to RSS to disown any individual or organization previously directly or through another associate organization, associated with its vision and activities.

The RSS indulges in conspiracies too. This can be gleaned by the following disclosure in Param Vaibhav Ke Path Par about a case in Delhi immediately after Partition:

“Swayamsevaks had posed to have adopted Musalman religion in order to gain the confidence of Delhi Muslim League for knowing their conspiracies.”

[Ibid, p. 86.]

What these swayamsevaks, impersonating as Muslims, on the eve of Independence were doing was made clear by none other than Dr. Rajendra Prasad who later became first President of the Indian Republic. In a letter to the first Home Minister of India, Sardar Patel, on March 14, 1948, Prasad wrote:

“I am told that RSS people have a plan of creating trouble. They have got a number of men dressed as Muslims and looking like Muslims who are to create trouble with the Hindus by attacking them and thus inciting the Hindus. Similarly there will be some Hindus among them who will attack Muslims and thus incite Muslims. The result of this kind of trouble amongst the Hindus and Muslims will be to create a conflagration.”

[Rajendra Prasad to Sardar Patel (March 14, 1948) cited in Neerja Singh (ed.), Nehru – Patel: Agreement Within Difference—Select Documents & Correspondences 1933-1950, NBT, Delhi, p. 43.]

The following is the list of organisations mentioned in this controversial and now unavailable RSS publication. Many more have surfaced after publication of this book. The serial numbering is the same as in the book. The bracket has been added to explain the nature and function of each organisation.

1. Akhil Bhartiya Vidhyarthi Parishad (Student)
2. Vidya Bhrati (Education)
3. BJP (political)
4. VHP, Bajrang Dal, Durga Vahini, Dharam Sansad or Religious Parliament (Anti-Minority).

The RSS insists that Dharam Sansad is the highest supreme body of Hindus. This book tells us that, “Vishwa Hindu Parishad established Dharam Sansad in 1984”. It means that the Dharam Sansad, or the religious parliament, is a puppet in the hands of the VHP, child of RSS.

5. Akhil Bharati Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram (Tribal)
6. Bhartiya Mazdoor Sangh (Working Class)
7. Bhartiya Kisan Sangh (Peasants)
8. Rashtra Sevika Samiti (Social Work-Women)
9. SEWA BHARATI and TATSAM

(Social Work. Both these outfits have taken over all governmental welfare programmes in slums and poor areas even in cities like Delhi even during Congress rule. These are basically fronts to garner government funds to the RSS. Recently this one even got license for sending adopted kids outside the country)

10. Vishva Vibhag (Foreign Affairs)
11. Akhil Bhartiya Rashtriya Shikshak Mahasangh (Education)
12. Bhartiya Shiksha Mandal (Education)
13. Rashtriya Sikh Sangat (Sikhs)
14. Swadeshi Jagaran Manch (Economics, gets crores of rupees from government departments)
15. Deen Dayal Shodh Sansthan (Intellectual)
16. Bharat Vikas Parishad (similar to # 9 above)
17. Bhartiya Itihas Sankalan Yojna (History)
18. Sanskrit Bharati (Sanskrit Language which is favourite of the UGC these days)
19. Sanskar Bharati (Culture, was in the fore-front against artist MF Hussain and films like Fire)
20. Akhil Bharti Adhivakta Parishad (Lawyers)
21. Hindu Jagaran Manch (Against the terrible attacks on Christians and Muslims in Gujarat and other parts of the country were owned by it)
22. Samajik Samrasta Manch (Anti-reservation front)
23. Akhil Bhartiya Sahitya Parishad (History)
24. Pragya Bharati (Religious)
25. Vigyan Bharati (Science)
26. Laghu Udyog Bharati (Industry – Huge government funds available)
27. Akhil Bhartiya Grahsak Panchayat (Consumers)
28. Sehkar Bharati (Cooperative – gets huge government funds).
29. Poorva Sainik Sewa Parishad (Ex-Servicemen)
30. Bharat Prakashan (Publishes organs of the RSS like the Organiser)
31. Suruchi Prakashan, Delhi (RSS central publication house)
32. Lokhit Prakashan, Lucknow (Publication)
33. Gyan Ganga Prakashan, Jaipur (Publication)
34. Archana Prakashan, Bhopal (Publication)
35. Akashvani Prakashan, Jullundur (Publication)
36. Bhartiya Vichar Sadhana, Nagpur (Publication)
37. Sadhana Prakashan, Gujarat (Publication)

About 10 more publishing houses in various parts of the country. Journals; Organiser (English, Panjanya, Rashtr Dharm (Hindi).

Not listed: Arogya Bharti, Garbh Vigyan Sanskar (Uterus Science Culture for producing tall, white Aryan babies), Muslim Rashtriya Manch and the management of dozens of Military schools (Bhosale academies).

Fabrications and Half-Truths

Mohan Bhagwat, in true RSS fashion has stated that “RSS does not accept government funds.” However many of its offshoots (santans) not only get Indian government funds but received foreign aid also from international agencies like the World Bank.

Only recently, the Akhil Bharati Vanvasi Kalyan Ashram held a big all India event (May 21-25, 2026) at Delhi for which RSS-BJP government played host. Reported by The Telegraph, the report may be read here.

According to an investigative story out of funds for a prominent sports mission, the flagship Target Olympic Podium Scheme (preparing elite athletes) crores of rupees was set aside by facilities for senior bureaucrats and two RSS-linked institutions in Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh. Indian Express reported this diversion of funds, actually a scam. There are thousands and thousands such cases which do not come to lime light because RSS is not registered and accountable. RSS does not have bank account/s despite collecting billions of rupees from India and abroad, hiring lakhs of employees for overt and covert activities.

An Indian activist, a passionate Indian, Lalan Singh, a worker from Nagpur has been has been, for years, knocking at the judiciary at almost all levels for securing a simple answer to the query asking under what rules RSS is provided state security costing billions of rupees of people’s money. However, no court has, so far ordered any disclosure.

It does not augur well for the largest democracy of the world that a large unregistered amorphous organization is permitted to function, in manner in which critics have analysed, is fundamentally inimical to democracy, the Indian Constitution, Tricolour and Notions of Equality and Justice.

The most important ideologue of RSS, Golwalkar declared as early as 1940:

“RSS inspired by one flag, one leader and one ideology is lighting the flame of Hindutva in each and every corner of this great land.

[[Golwalkar, MS, Shri Guruju Samgr Darshan (collected works of Golalkar in Hindi), Bhartiya Vichar Sadhna, Nagpur (RSS publication house), vol. I, n. d., p. 11.]

On the eve of independence, Organiser (dated August 14, 1947) denigrated Tricolour in the following words:

“The people who have come to power by the kick of fate may give in our hands the Tricolour but it will never be respected and owned by Hindus. The word three is in itself an evil, and a flag having three colours will certainly produce a very bad psychological effect and is injurious to a country.­”

The Constituent Assembly of India finalised the Constitution of India on November 26, 1949, and the RSS was “aggrieved”

Its organ, Organiser in an editorial on November 30, 1949, complained: “But in our Constitution there is no mention of the unique constitutional development in ancient Bharat. Manu’s Laws were written long before Lycurgus of Sparta or Solon of Persia. To this day, his laws as enunciated in the Manusmriti excite the admiration of the world and elicit spontaneous obedience and conformity. But to our constitutional pundits that means nothing.” RSS has never denied this preferential choice. Mind it, this text Manusmriti is not against Muslims or Christians but treats Hindu women and Sudras as “lower than animals.”

Today RSS is the backbone of a regime that has been in power for a decade. Bhagwat’s response to accountability by equating its 100 years’ of existence with ‘Hindu Dharm’ is a sign of political arrogance. Even Mohammad Ali Jinnah had equated the separatist and sectarian Muslim League with Islam!

If the Congress led by Priyank Kharge, Karnataka’s home minister ranges in this amorphous network, long-pending answers may be available to the people of India. Answers awaited since the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi!

June 16, 2026

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

Related:

Syama Prasad Mookerjee: ‘Patriot’ or collaborator of British Rulers & Muslim League?

Womens Reservation Bill 2026: Women’s Rights & the RSS

Have Hindus always been Vegetarian?

The post Disclosure and transparency from the RSS may finally expose decades-old ambiguities appeared first on SabrangIndia.

To understand why this matters beyond electoral law, we must place the SIR process within a deeper theoretical framework: the biopolitical understanding of Hindutva fascism. The question of who qualifies as a citizen, and whose body bears the imprint of the nation, lies at the heart of this analysis. When the state deletes a voter, it is not merely updating a roll; it is making a sovereign declaration about whose life is politically legible, and whose life can be reduced to bare existence.

The question of who qualifies as a human being, who attains citizenship, and the intricate relationship between humanity and citizenship is profoundly significant. Fascism, as a historical phenomenon, emerges as a radical redefinition of this relationship, transforming what once were purely anthropological inquiries into politically charged, nationalist, racial, and ultimately fascist projects.

In the ancient context, the distinction between City and Citizen was central to the organisation of society. The city-state, or polis, represented the epitome of political life. A resident of the polis was inherently political, echoing Aristotle’s famous assertion that humans are political animals. However, not all individuals born within the city-state were automatically granted citizenship. Thus, while humanity may be defined as inherently political, not every individual born within the city was considered a political being.

This subtle understanding emphasises the complexity of citizenship and political participation in ancient societies. It highlights the selective nature of citizenship and the hierarchical structures that governed access to political rights and privileges. In fascist contexts, this distinction becomes even more pronounced, as regimes seek to manipulate and redefine citizenship according to arbitrary criteria, including race, ethnicity, and religious ideology.

Ultimately, the question of who qualifies as a human being and who attains the status of a citizen is not merely an abstract philosophical inquiry but a deeply political and historical one. It speaks to the fundamental principles of equality, justice, and democracy and underlines the enduring struggle to uphold these ideals in the face of tyranny and oppression.

The Superimposed Body: From Birth to the Body Politic

In the ancient Greek democratic system, the concept of citizenship was strictly exclusive. Neither women nor slaves were afforded a share in the polis. They were relegated to a subhuman status or entirely excluded from the realm of political humanity. In this framework, reproduction and labour were perceived merely as animalistic qualities, devoid of the political agency (bios) granted to citizens.

The human body, far from being solely a product of nature (zoe), is inseparably entangled with politics and law. It embodies a complex amalgamation of natural and political forces; a synthesis forged in the crucible of societal norms and governance. At birth, an individual’s body becomes imbued with a biopolitical essence, a term denoting the state’s regulation and control over biological life, and a body politic is superimposed on their natural form.

This fusion of the natural and the political renders the body a site of power and control, subject to the whims of the state, fascism, and sovereignty. It is through this superimposed body politic that individuals are governed and regulated, with their rights and freedoms dictated by the structures of power that govern society. Thus, the human body becomes not merely a vessel for biological existence but a battleground for competing political ideologies and systems of governance.

While Rousseau famously proclaimed that “man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains,” the truth of this statement is open to interpretation. Indeed, no individual is born into absolute freedom. Every human being is born into a web of preconceived roles and identities, predetermined by factors such as gender, language, nationality, and ethnicity.

The assertion that man is a political animal emphasises that human birth is not only a biological event but also inherently political. Each individual’s entry into the world is inseparable from the socio-political context of their birth. Their very existence is framed within a politico-juridical landscape, in which legal and political frameworks shape their rights, responsibilities, and opportunities.

Sovereignty, Agamben, and the Tragedy of the Declaration

The evolution of citizenship from ancient city-states to modern nation-states marks a profound transformation in the status of individuals, shifting them from subjects to active participants in political life. This shift also extended citizenship to previously excluded groups, broadening political engagement and rights. The transition from the sovereignty of kings to national sovereignty reflects the emergence of public sovereignty, in which the authority of governance is vested in the collective body of citizens.

However, the philosopher Giorgio Agamben highlights the latent risks inherent in this apparently progressive transition. By interrogating foundational documents such as the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789) and the development of habeas corpus in England, Agamben reveals the complexities and ambiguities underlying the construction of citizenship in modern liberal democracy. These documents, while intended to safeguard individual rights and freedoms, also reinforce structures of power and exclusion, perpetuating inequalities and hierarchies within society.

The French Declaration of Rights asserts that “Men are born and remain free and equal in rights,” emphasising the fundamental equality and freedom inherent in all individuals. However, the term “man” in this context refers to a specific subset of humanity, namely, the citizen. While seemingly universal, the rights enshrined in the declaration are exercisable only by citizens, narrowing the scope of entitlements to a specific legal and political category.

This transition from the broader concept of “man” to the more limited category of “citizen” marks a shift from a natural or biological understanding of humanity to a legal and political construct. In essence, the declaration replaces the inherent rights of all human beings with the societal framework of citizenship, thereby transforming the abstract notion of “man” into the tangible status of “citizen.”

The transition from God-given royal sovereignty to national sovereignty marks a significant shift from subjects to citizens. However, this transition also brings a profound tragedy: the commodification of birth itself as a point of sovereignty. While all beings are born, not all possess the inherent rights to equality and life. These rights are reserved only for individuals whose bodies are explicitly imbued with citizenship. The metaphor of commodification describes how the modern nation-state transforms the natural, biological act of human birth into a state-controlled asset, a legal registry, and a tool of political currency. When modern democracy overthrew kings, sovereignty shifted to “The People” (National Sovereignty). But this created a massive bureaucratic problem for the new state: Who exactly are “The People”? Where does the state get its legitimacy?

The modern state’s answer was Birth. The nation-state linked political legitimacy directly to human reproduction. It declared that, by virtue of being born within a certain territory (jus soli) or to certain parents (jus sanguinis), a biological body is automatically claimed by the state. This is where commodification occurs. The state steps into the maternity ward, establishes a “territory” in the mother’s womb, and places an invisible, sovereign “tag” on the newborn body. The state turns the most innocent, natural act, a child entering the world, into the ultimate site of sovereign control, policing, and structural exclusion.

If your birth occurs outside the arbitrary criteria of the state, or if a majoritarian state retroactively changes the rules of belonging (like the ECI’s voter deletions or citizenship screenings), your birth is stripped of its political currency. You become an administrative Homo Sacer, a bare life. Your birth is suddenly worth nothing under the law.

According to Agamben, this transformation from biopolitics to “thanatopolitics”, a politics centred on the power to decide who matters and who is marked for death, occurs precisely at the intersection of citizenship, where the distinction between life and death becomes increasingly blurred. The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), together with the proposed Uniform Civil Code (UCC), exemplifies this biopolitical shift in contemporary India, raising deep concerns about the potential legal vulnerability and targeted disenfranchisement of Indian Muslims.

The Political Production of the Homo Sacer

When attempting to define citizenship, the concept of identity becomes paramount. Defining citizenship is inherently problematic, as it often involves delineating oneself from the “other.” This process is particularly significant in Indian social psychology, where self-awareness as a Hindu often arises primarily in contrast to the identity of a Muslim. In the political absence of this “other,” the monolithic Hindu identity risks regressing into its internal, fractured realities of caste. To define oneself, one must establish something outside oneself. Thus, majoritarian citizenship can only be comprehended by creating an external boundary through the definition of the “other” and subsequent exclusion.

The answer to the question of citizenship varies with the ideology governing a nation. In some contexts, citizenship is defined by birthright (jus soli): anyone born within the country’s borders is considered a citizen. However, in regimes such as Nazi Germany, Ethnic Israel, and Hindutva India, citizenship is increasingly untethered from the place of birth and is instead tied to racial, ethnic, or religious identity. Hitler’s concept of German citizenship was strictly limited to those born within the Aryan race, excluding others regardless of birthplace.

This racialised or communalised notion of citizenship transforms the human body into a biopolitical entity, in which citizenship becomes a political stamp imposed on nature. Fascism divides society along identity lines, relegating certain groups to the margins through arbitrary definitions of belonging. Yet such exclusionary definitions erode individuals’ inherent humanity, reducing them to mere subjects of political ideology rather than autonomous beings.

In an ethnically defined concept of citizenship, individuals who do not belong to the designated group are considered to be born without rights. They are viewed as “Homo Sacer”, an ancient legal figure resurrected by Agamben to describe individuals whose lives are deemed “bare life,” stripped of legal protection, expendable, and subject to targeting with impunity. In essence, their mere biological existence is seen as a threat to the ideological purity of the state, rendering them legally disposable.

The Democratic Channel to Fascism

With the rise of modern democracy, marginalised lives, women, workers, and the vulnerable were formally integrated into the political sphere, leading to the complete politicisation of human birth and natural life. The modern nation-state rests on a political framework in which existence itself is explicitly managed by law. Consequently, those deemed irrelevant or dangerous by authority can be stripped of their political rights and expelled from the system.

This process renders anyone susceptible to political disenfranchisement, transforming them into Homo Sacer. Agamben’s observation remains highly relevant today: whereas biopolitics in Nazi Germany targeted specific, legally catalogued religious and ethnic groups as scapegoats, today any citizen can be reduced to bare life. The concept of bare life is no longer confined to an exceptional category; it resides within the biological body of every living being, leaving everyone vulnerable to being stripped of their rights and reduced to mere existence at the state’s discretion.

Agamben argues that modern democracy does not eliminate the sacred, banishable life but rather fragments and disperses it across every individual body, investing it in all civic bodies. When definitions change, citizens are transformed into refugees. This is historically exemplified by the plight of German Jews who lost their citizenship following the implementation of the Nuremberg Laws, as well as by Rohingya Muslims and Palestinians who were forced into refugee status due to shifting political boundaries and legal classifications.

Modern nation-states and democracies are founded on the biopolitical framework of citizenship, which determines who is considered a citizen. In this context, fascism is not an antithetical force opposing democracy; rather, it embodies the core political logic inherent in modern democracy itself. This explains how democratically elected leaders can transition seamlessly from democratic governance to fascist tendencies. The trajectory from democracy to fascism is facilitated by the underlying structures of democracy, such as majority rule, executive centralisation, and legal codification, which can morph into fascist ideologies when the constitutional coating of democracy is stripped away.

(To be continued)

Courtesy: The AIDEM

The post The Biopolitical Anatomy of Hindutva Fascism: Citizenship, Sovereignty and Bare Life |Part 1| appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerjee (SPM 1901-1953) is a prominent Hindutva icon for the RSS/BJP brigade. It was he who, on the advice of M.S. Golwalkar, the second chief of RSS and its most prominent ideologue, founded the Bharatiya Jana Sangh (BJS), predecessor of the present Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP) in 1951 and became the first president of the political arm of the RSS.

Modi and the Hindutva brigade is fond of declaring Mookerjee as great nationalist and patriot who laid down his life for the unity of the nation. The Hindutva rhetoric about patriotism of Mookerjee needs to be crosschecked with the contemporary documents available in RSS and Hindu Mahasabha archives.

Perusal of these documents clearly shows that the claim that Dr Syama Prasad Mookerjee was a ‘selfless patriot’ and a great patriot right from his birth is a white lie. Mookerjee never-never participated in the anti-colonial freedom struggle. If patriotism means being part of the freedom struggle and making sacrifices, Mookerjee not only kept aloof from it but also betrayed it by collaborating with the British rulers and the Muslim League in order to crush and communally polarize the anti-British liberation movement.

In the pre-Independence period, he was a prominent leader of the Hindu Mahasabha, which was led by Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. When in 1942 Congress gave a call to the British rulers to leave India immediately by launching Quit India Movement (QIM), the British rulers responded to this mass movement by unleashing a reign of terror. Congress was banned, its provincial governments were dismissed, whole of India was turned into a jail and thousands died in the repression unleashed by armed forces of the British and the native rulers. The crime of many of those who were killed was that they dared to carry or unfurl the Tricolour, flag of the resistance.

Hindu ‘nationalist’ organisations namely, Hindu Mahasabha and RSS with the Muslim League (which since 1940 was ferociously demanding Partition of India) not only boycotted QIM but also decided to support the British government in its repressive campaign. The Hindu nationalists under the leadership of Savarkar even ran coalition governments with the Muslim League led by Mohammad Ali Jinnah.

The Hindu Mahasabha president ‘Veer’ Savarkar joyously chronicled this ganging up of Hindu Mahasabha with the Muslim League in his presidential speech to the 24th session of the Hindu Mahasabha at Kanpur in 1942 in the following words:

“In practical politics also the Mahasabha knows that we must advance through reasonable compromises. Witness the fact that only recently in Sind, the Sind-Hindu-Sabha on invitation had taken the responsibility of joining hands with the League itself in running coalition Government. The case of Bengal is well known. Wild Leaguers whom even the Congress with all its submissiveness could not placate grew quite reasonably compromising and sociable as soon as they came in contact with the Hindu Mahasabha and the Coalition Government, under the premiership of Mr. Fazlul Huq and the able lead of our esteemed Mahasabha leader Dr Syama Prasad Mookerji, functioned successfully for a year or so to the benefit of both the communities.”

[Savarkar, VD., Samagar Savarkar Wangmaya (Collected Works of Savarkar), Hindu Mahasabha, Poona, 1963, pp. 479-480.]

Later this coalition arrangement was extended to NWFP (now in Pakistan, known as Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) also. SPM was Deputy PM (those days chief minister was designated as prime minister) and held the Home portfolio which oversaw the crushing of QIM.

Following the Hindu Mahasabha directive to co-operate with the British, the Hindutva icon, Dr. Mookerjee assured the British masters through a letter dated July 26, 1942. In an autobiographical work he confessed:

“Let me now refer to the situation that may be created in the province as a result of any widespread movement launched by the Congress. Anybody, who during the war, plans to stir up mass feeling, resulting internal disturbances or insecurity, must be resisted by any Government that may function for the time being”

[Mookerjee, Shyama Prasad, Leaves from a Dairy, Oxford University Press, p. 179.]

Mookerjee’s letter to Bengal governor that the Fazlul Haq led Bengal Government, along with its alliance partner Hindu Mahasabha had made concrete plan for suppressing QIM is to be read and believed:

“The question is how to combat this movement (Quit India) in Bengal? The administration of the province should be carried on in such a manner that in spite of the best efforts of the Congress, this movement will fail to take root in the province. It should be possible for us, especially responsible Ministers, to be able to tell the public that the freedom for which the Congress has started the movement, already belongs to the representatives of the people. In some spheres it might be limited during the emergency. Indian have to trust the British, not for the sake for Britain, not for any advantage that the British might gain, but for the maintenance of the defense and freedom of the province itself. You, as Governor, will function as the constitutional head of the province and will be guided entirely on the advice of your Minister.”

[Cited in A G. Noorani, The RSS and the BJP: A Division of Labour, LeftWord Books, pp. 56–57.]

It was an abashed glorification of the foreign rule when he stated that freedom

“already belongs to the representatives of the people…Indian have to trust the British, not for the sake for Britain, not for any advantage that the British might gain, but for the maintenance of the defense and freedom of the province itself”.

A prominent historian of India R.C. Majumdar who is also regarded as a true ‘Bhartiya’ historian by the Hindutva brigade commenting on this letter wrote:

“Shyam Prasad ended the letter with a discussion of the mass movement organised by the Congress. He expressed the apprehension that the movement would create internal disorder and will endanger internal security during the war by exciting popular feeling and he opined that any government in power has to suppress it, but that according to him could not be done only by persecution…. In that letter he mentioned item wise the steps to be taken for dealing with the situation…”

[RC Majumdar, History of Modern Bengal, vol. 2, G. Bharadwaj & Co, Calcutta, p. 350.]

The Hindu Mahasabha decision to betray Quit India Movement resonated with the RSS also. MS Golwalkar, the then chief of RSS admitted:

“In 1942 also there was a strong sentiment in the hearts of many. At that time too the routine work of Sangh continued. Sangh vowed not to do anything directly. However, upheaval (uthal-puthal) in the minds of Sangh volunteers continued. Sangh is an organization of inactive persons, their talks are useless, not only outsiders but also many of our volunteers did talk like this. They were greatly disgusted too.”

[Shri Guruji Samagar Darshan (collected works of Golwalkar in Hindi), vol. IV, Bhartiya Vichar Sadhna, Nagpur, nd, p 40.]

Nowhere in pre-Partition RSS literature do we find any references to any work which RSS might have done ‘indirectly’ against the British for Quit India Movement.

In a more shocking development, the Hindu Mahasabha of Dr Mookerjee decided to help the British rulers in World War II. It was the time when Subhash Chandra Bose, known as Netaji, was organizing the INA (Azad Hind Fauj) in a military campaign to force the British out. The extent to which the Hindu Mahasabha was willing to help the British masters is clear from the following directive issued by Savarkar as President of the Mahasabha:

“So far as India’s defence is concerned, Hindudom must ally unhesitatingly, in a spirit of responsive co-operation, with the war effort of the Indian government in so far as it is consistent with the Hindu interests, by joining the Army, Navy and the Aerial forces in as large a number as possible and by securing an entry into all ordnance, ammunition and war craft factories…. Again it must be noted that Japan’s entry into the war has exposed us directly and immediately to the attack by Britain’s enemies. Consequently, whether we like it or not, we shall have to defend our own hearth and home against the ravages of the war and this can only be done by intensifying the government’s war effort to defend India. Hindu Mahasabhaites must, therefore, rouse Hindus especially in the provinces of Bengal and Assam as effectively as possible to enter the military forces of all arms without losing a single minute.”

[V.D. Savarkar, Samagra Savarkar Wangmaya: Hindu Rashtra Darshan, vol. 6, Maharashtra Prantik Hindusabha, Poona, 1963, p. 460.]

Thus, according to PM Modi and Hindutva brigade, being a ‘patriot’ and ‘self-less’ freedom fighter is synonymous with being a stooge of the British, a collaborator of Jinnah led Muslim League and organiser of mass murders of brave participants of Quit India Movement. All those who fought and laid down their lives against the colonial masters for freedom of an all-inclusive democratic-secular must then have been fools!

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

Related:

Dr Syama Prasad Mookerjee the Hindutva Icon was a Collaborator, with the Muslim League as much as the British

Syama Prasad Mookerjee: How `selfless’ was this `patriot’?

The post Syama Prasad Mookerjee: ‘Patriot’ or collaborator of British Rulers & Muslim League? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Kharge went public with this intention last week and today made public a detailed letter that he posted on ‘X’, the afternoon of Monday June 15. In this post, addressing the RSS Supremo, Mohan Bhagwat, the Karnataka’s home minister around 4 p.m., said, “My letter will reach you shortly. However, I thought it was important to draw your attention to this matter early. Firstly, congratulations to the RSS on completing 100 years. An organisation that claims over 60,000 shakhas and crores of swayamsevaks must also uphold transparency and constitutional accountability. As per RSS’ highest and most important decision-making body Akhil Bharatiya Pratinidhi Sabha’s 2025–26 Karnataka report, the RSS has 4,127 daily shakhas, 1,389 weekly milans, 60 monthly mandalis, 2,194 Samajotsavas with 19.61 lakh participants and held 562 route marches with 2.21 lakh uniformed participants in the state. With such scale and influence, the RSS must clarify its legal status, registration, office bearers, funding, expenditure, taxation and permissions for public activities. If citizens, labour, NGOs, trusts, temples and companies are expected to register, disclose and comply with the law, why should the RSS remain exempt? In its centenary year, the RSS must responsibly abide by the Constitution and register, disclose, pay applicable taxes and function transparently within the Constitution.” The letter is signed off by Priyank Kharge, Minister for Home, Information Technology & Biotechnology and e-Governance and has created ripples already.

Dear Shri Mohan Bhagwat ji,

My letter will reach you shortly. However, I thought it was important to draw your attention to this matter early.
——————————-

Firstly, congratulations to the RSS on completing 100 years.

An organisation that claims over 60,000 shakhas and crores of… pic.twitter.com/IZy4oeKdMp

— Priyank Kharge / ಪ್ರಿಯಾಂಕ್ ಖರ್ಗೆ (@PriyankKharge) June 15, 2026

The text of the letter may be read below:

Date: 13.06.2026

To,

Shri Mohan Bhagwat

Sarsanghchalak Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh Nagpur

Subject: Congratulations on completing 100 years of existence and request for legal clarification on organisational status

Dear Sir,

At the outset, I extend my congratulations to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh on completing 100 years of its existence. An organisation that claims to have over 60,000 shakhas and crores of swayamsevaks across India and abroad undoubtedly has a significant presence in public life and society.

It is precisely because of this scale, influence and reach that the RSS must be held to the highest standards of transparency, accountability and constitutional compliance.

According to the annual report for 2025-26 released by the Akhil Bharatiya Pratinidhi Sabha (ABPS), the highest decision-making body of the RSS, the organisation has a significant footprint in Karnataka, with 4,127 daily shakhas, 1,389 weekly milans and 60 monthly mandalis.

The RSS’ public mobilisation is equally extensive. As per your report, the organisation conducted 2,194 Samajotsavas, drawing 19,61,158 participants. You also claim to have organised 562 route marches across the State, usually covering 2.5 to 3 km, with 2, 21,963 uniformed participants. Taken together, these figures show a vast, disciplined and deeply embedded network operating across Karnataka through daily cadre-building, weekly and monthly outreach, mass public events and uniformed route marches.

Such an extensive organisational presence, especially when it involves regular public mobilisation, uniformed route marches and large-scale social outreach, cannot be treated as a private or informal arrangement. It raises legitimate questions about legal status, accountability, financial transparency, public order, permissions, and sources of funding and compliance with the Constitution and laws of India.

We therefore request the RSS to depute its authorised office bearers to explain the legal grounds on which an organisation of such magnitude continues to function with anonymity and without being formally registered as a legal entity or as a “body of individuals” under the applicable laws.

In a constitutional democracy, no organisation, however old, large or influential, can remain above scrutiny. Every citizen, association, institution and body that operates in public life is expected to comply with the law. In Bharath, even a safai karamchari must be registered to avail government benefits. Every religious institution and religious trusts are audited. Charitable bodies, NGOs, trusts, societies, companies and other institutions are required to disclose their structure, activities, finances and sources of income.

In this context, it is only fair and necessary that the RSS also comes forward and places the following information in the public domain:

1. Its legal status and organisational structure.
2. Details of its office bearers and authorised representatives.
3. Sources of donations, contributions and income.
4. Details of expenditure and assets.
5. Whether applicable taxes are being paid in accordance with law.
6. The legal basis on which organisation activities are conducted without formal registration.
7. The constitutional and statutory framework under which it claims the right to operate at such scale without public accountability.
8. Details of permissions, authorisations and compliance mechanisms for public events, route marches, mass gatherings and other organised activities.

An organisation that regularly evokes nationalism, discipline and duty must also demonstrate these values through transparency, compliance and respect for the Constitution of India.

The RSS cannot ask ordinary Indians to follow rules while exempting itself from the same standards. If workers, small associations, religious institutions, NGOs, trusts, companies and citizens are expected to register, disclose, audit and pay taxes, then the RSS too must set an example by abiding by the rules of the land.

We therefore call upon the RSS to use the occasion of its centenary not merely for celebration, but for constitutional introspection. The best tribute it can pay to India in its 100th year is to register itself, disclose its activities and finances, pay all applicable taxes, and function as a transparent and accountable organisation within the framework of Indian law.

We look forward to receiving a formal response and to the deputation of your authorised office bearers for a discussion on the above matters.

Thank you.

PRIYANK KHARGE.

The RSS Supremo was quoted by social media users in a video stating that Responding to a query during a program in #Thrissur, Mohan Bhagwat said the RSS has always functioned openly and never operated in secrecy. “We are not secretive; we are working on open ground. Our shakhas are held in public spaces, our karyakartas live in localities, and people see them daily. We have enormous outreach programs, including Hindu Sammelans in every block this year,” he stated.

Mohan Bhagwat emphasized that the Sangh has faced similar challenges since its inception. “After 10–15 years of starting Sangh, we had to face all these things. We are used to it. If they don’t happen, we feel something is amiss,” he remarked, adding that the organization was born out of “public will” during British rule. He pointed out that the RSS had been banned twice in the past, but the bans were lifted, once through a court order and once through satyagraha.

“Government knows Sangh is there. Our constitution was submitted to the government in the 1950s. Nobody told us to register. Hindu Dharma is not registered. Many things are not registered. So why should I respond? All this is politics. Nothing serious,” Bhagwat said.

The RSS chief accused political opponents of attempting to “hamper Sangh work” and “create doubts in the minds of people,” but insisted such efforts would fail, as “people know us.”

Related:

Appeal by Adivasi-Mulvasi leaders to Jharkhandis: Protect Birsa Munda’s legacy from the RSS

Womens Reservation Bill 2026: Women’s Rights & the RSS

Denigration of martyrs like Bhagat Singh, Rajguru, Sukhdev – a peep into RSS archives

The post Register, Disclose, Pay Taxes: Karnataka HM Priyank Kharge to the RSS appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Dear friends,

Some newspapers reported that after a meeting with officials yesterday, Deputy Chief Minister D.K. Shivakumar instructed authorities to immediately provide residence certificates to those who require them for SIR. As per a report in The New Indian Express.

However, according to the list of 11 documents released by the Election Commission for SIR, a simple “Residential Certificate” is not sufficient. The Commission specifically requires:
Permanent Residence Certificate (PRC) issued by the competent State authority
To obtain a Residential Certificate, documents such as Aadhaar, ration card, electricity/water bills, rental agreements, etc., are usually sufficient.
However, for a Permanent Residence Certificate, additional proof is required showing permanent residence in the state for more than six years. This may include long-term ration cards, property records, or evidence of having studied in the state or resided in the state for more than six years.
Only after verification of such documents can the competent authority—the Tahsildar or Deputy Tahsildar—issue the certificate.

The question is: if the government hurriedly issues certificates without fully following these requirements, will the Election Commission accept them?

The West Bengal Experience

When SIR was conducted in West Bengal, residents submitted domicile certificates issued by the state government to prove their status. Attention: These were not ordinary residence certificates but permanent residence (domicile) certificates.

However, the Election Commission initially rejected them, arguing that they did not satisfy its prescribed Permanent Residence Certificate requirements. It also ordered that even those who had already submitted domicile certificates could be issued fresh notices. This was reported here.

As a result, then Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee publicly protested and later approached the Supreme Court. Only after these developments did the Election Commission, on February 9, agree to accept West Bengal domicile certificates as SIR eligibility documents, subject to several conditions. The conditions included:

1) EROs and AEROs could accept only those residence certificates issued in accordance with the West Bengal Government Order dated November 2, 1999.

2) The certificates had to be issued only by competent authorities such as District Magistrates, Additional District Magistrates, Sub-Divisional Officers, or the District Collector of Kolkata.

3) The certificates had to be issued strictly according to government guidelines.

4) All officials were required to be informed of and comply with these guidelines.

This has been detailed here.

This demonstrates the Election Commission’s “strict” (or exclusivist) approach—even toward permanent residence certificates issued by a state government. The Supreme Court has also upheld this authority.

States like Karnataka May Face Greater Difficulties

The ordinary residence certificate referred to by the Chief Minister of Karnataka, DK Shivakumar does not meet the “Permanent Residence Certificate” requirement under SIR. Given the West Bengal experience, only a Karnataka Domicile Certificate is likely to satisfy the Commission’s Permanent Residence Certificate requirement.

However, the same conditions imposed in West Bengal may effectively apply in Karnataka as well.
Generally, to establish Karnataka domicile status, one may need to show:

– Residence in Karnataka for seven years,
– More than six years of education in Karnataka,
– Parents residing in Karnataka, or
– Ownership of property in Karnataka.

These documents must then be verified and approved by the competent authority, usually a Tahsildar or higher-ranking official.

Therefore, since the Election Commission appears determined to use SIR to remove/exclude as many people as possible from electoral rolls on technical grounds, even minor procedural lapses in obtaining domicile certificates could be treated as discrepancies and lead to rejection.

Karnataka’s Chief Electoral Officer, Ambu Kumar, has already stated that a “discrepancy” AI will be applied after submission of Enumeration Forms in Karnataka as well.

Consequently, D.K. Shivakumar’s general instruction to issue residence certificates to everyone who needs them is unlikely, by itself, to protect Dalit and other marginalized communities in Karnataka from the risks posed by SIR. For this reason, the instruction to issue residence certificates should not be viewed as a victory, nor is a cause for complacency.

Therefore, let us remember:
– A Residential Certificate does not satisfy the Permanent Residence Certificate requirement.
– Obtaining a Domicile Certificate that may satisfy the Permanent Residence Certificate requirement is not easy for many eligible members of marginalized communities.

– Documents obtained without following the proper procedure and authority may not be accepted by the Election Commission.

Let us remain alert and not get carried away

Let SIR be completely withdrawn — let democracy survive

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

Related:

Jharkhand’s Biggest Democratic Test Yet: The SIR Challenge

SC greenlights SIR, upholds ECI’s power to revise electoral rolls

Documents Cannot Decide Democracy: How CJP is training communities to navigate the SIR process

The post Anti-SIR Activists Beware: A mere Residential Certificate does not satisfy SIR requirements appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The current football World Cup is the most expansive in history. It is also the most exclusionary. International Federation of Association Football (FIFA), the governing body of world football, has expanded this World Cup (WC) to 48 teams and a total of 104 matches, the most ever.

The post How FIFA is Asphyxiating the Beautiful Game appeared first on SabrangIndia.