With this declaration, Matleb has cleared his name of the “foreigner” tag — a stigma that haunted him for decades despite overwhelming documentary evidence of his Indian lineage. Matleb’s struggle came to an end when the Foreigners Tribunal in Assam formally declared him an Indian on May 17, 2025 — a moment made possible by the unwavering support of Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP).

Matleb Ali stands outside his home holding the order passed by the Foreigners Tribunal (Dhubri)

This is more than just a legal victory — it’s a testament to resilience, community solidarity, and the courage to stand up against a system that too often fails the most vulnerable.

The Origin of the Case: A 1998 reference

Matleb Ali, also recorded in official documents as Matleb Ali or Motleb Ali, was born in 1981 in the remote village of Ramraikuti Part I in Assam’s Dhubri district, about 251 kilometres from Guwahati. The village, perched on India’s border with Bangladesh, has long been home to his family — generation after generation.

He completed his matriculation from Agomani Higher Secondary School, an institution established shortly after India’s independence. His father, Kasem Ali, was a lifelong resident of Ramraikuti, owning land there as early as 1962. His grandparents, Sonaullah Sk and Kosimon Bewa, were registered voters in the 1966 electoral rolls — clear, continuous proof of Indian lineage.

Yet in 1998, the unthinkable happened: a reference was made against Matleb, branding him a suspected foreigner. Despite having all the required documents, he was forced into a legal battle to prove his very identity — a fate shared by thousands of marginalized residents in Assam, particularly those living near the border.

The ordeal began when the Superintendent of Police (Border), Dhubri, acting on a report from the Electoral Registration Officer of the 25 No. Golakganj Legislative Assembly Constituency, filed a reference case against Matleb Ali. His name was listed in the 1997 draft electoral roll for his village Ramraikuti Part-I, but doubts were raised about his citizenship during house-to-house enumeration (Jan–Apr 1997). The matter was first referred to the IM(D)T Tribunal, later transferred to Foreigners Tribunal No. 2, and finally to the 10^th Foreigners Tribunal.

Despite being born and raised in India, Matleb was forced to prove he wasn’t an illegal migrant — a fate that disproportionately affects many poor, marginalised people in Assam, particularly in border districts like Dhubri.

Eid turned to despair

In mid-2023, just a day before Eid, Matleb’s world turned upside down. While he was working in Guwahati to earn enough to celebrate the festival with his family — his wife, two children, and elderly mother — police officers in plain clothes came to his home in Ramraikuti and handed a notice to his wife. The document summoned him before the Foreigners Tribunal.

His young daughter handed over the notice when he returned home. The joy of Eid evaporated as the devastating contents of the letter became clear. “It was as if all the light had gone out of our lives,” his wife later recalled while speaking to CJP Assam team.

Matleb knew the road ahead would be difficult. Fighting a tribunal case required time, money, and legal knowledge — resources he did not have. If he chased documents and attended hearings, his family would go hungry. If he chose to work, he would miss court dates and lose the case.

CJP steps in, hope rekindled

In desperation, Matleb turned to a trusted neighbour, who introduced him to Moon Kazi, a community volunteer with Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP). From that moment on, the tide began to turn.

CJP’s District Volunteer Motivator (DVM) for Dhubri, Habibul Bepari, quickly visited the family. After reviewing the documents, he escalated the case to Nanda Ghosh, CJP’s Assam State In-charge, and Advocate Ishkander Azad, a member of CJP’s legal team in the district.

CJP Assam Team outside the Foreigners Tribunal Court in Dhubri

The family, mentally and emotionally exhausted, found renewed hope. “Without CJP, I could never have fought this alone,” said Matleb, his voice filled with emotion after receiving the order declaring his citizenship.

CJP took over the case with full dedication — collecting documents, filing applications, visiting government offices, and providing legal representation. This allowed Matleb to remain home and earn a living while the organization fought the case on his behalf.

Documents provided in the Tribunal to establish Matleb’s identity and lineage

The following documents were provided to the Tribunal in order to establish the Indian identity of Matleb:

• HSLC Admit Card (Ext-A) – Verified as genuine by SEBA, establishing both his date of birth and parentage.
• School Certificate (Ext-B) – Issued by Agomani School, confirming his education and village of residence.
• Copy of shifting certificate issued by the Secretary, Satrasal Gaon Panchayat

His family tree was also established:

• Grandparents: Sonaullah Sk and Kosimon Bewa — Voter records from 1966, 1970, 1977, and 1985 show them living in Ramraikuti.
• Father: Kasem Ali — Listed as a voter in 1977.
• Mother: Moslema Bewa — Listed as a voter from 1979 onward, including with Matleb in the 1997 and 2008 rolls.

In addition to electoral records, land deeds were also provided:

• Matleb’s father owned land since 1962, as per Khatian No. 64 (Ext-E), backed by the original land records and verified through the Land Records Officer’s testimony (DW-3).
• Matleb himself co-owns land with his family in Ramraikuti, as shown by Periodic Kheraj Patta (Ext-M).

Additionally, Matleb’s own name consistently appears in voter rolls from 1997, 2008, and 2023, and he holds an Elector Photo Identity Card (Ext-L) issued in 2013.

The Legal Proceedings: Evidence vs suspicion

When the matter finally came before the tribunal, Advocate Ishkander Azad presented a compelling argument. He highlighted Matleb’s strong documentary evidence — including voter records of three generations, land documents, and school certificates. Azad also emphasized the hardship Matleb faced in commuting from distant work locations just to attend hearings, often at great financial and emotional cost.

Notably, the Referral Authority presented no witnesses or documentary evidence. In contrast, Matleb submitted:

• 13 documents (Exts A to M), including educational records, land documents, and voter lists from 1966 to 2023.
• Oral evidence from:
  • Himself (DW-1)
  • His mother, Moslema Bewa (DW-2), who fully corroborated his statements
  • A Land Records official (DW-3), who authenticated historical land ownership

The tribunal accepted the entire chain of documentary and oral evidence as genuine and trustworthy.

The Order: “He is Indian”!

After considering the evidence, Tribunal Member Rafiqul Islam delivered a clear verdict:

“From the evidence on record and finding no rebuttal evidence, there is no reason to disbelieve the testimony of the opposite party and documents exhibited by the opposite party in support of his testimony… Moreover, though the State cross examined both DW-1 and DW-2, the State could not demolish the evidences that grandparents of opposite party were not citizens of India and therefore the opposite party cannot be termed as a foreigner as suspected by the referral authority.” (Para 11)

He ordered that:

• The lineage from Indian grandparents, consistent voter records, land ownership, and educational credentials are sufficient to establish citizenship.
• There was no rebuttal evidence from the state to challenge the authenticity of any claims or documents.
• Matleb was born in India to Indian parents residing in Assam, and therefore qualifies as a citizen of India by birth under Indian law.

The tribunal answered the reference in the negative, officially declaring Matleb Ali not a foreigner.

A mother’s blessing, a daughter’s celebration

The order came just days after another joyful event in the family: Matleb’s daughter passed her matriculation examination. It was a moment of double celebration in the Ali household.

His mother, Moslema Bewa, broke down in tears of relief and gratitude. She showered blessings on the CJP team:

“Allah tomak bhalé rakhuk, āro jāté mānsher sahāy korbār pān! (May Allah keep you safe and grant you the strength to help many more!)”

She insisted the team stay for a meal, a simple but heartfelt gesture from a family who had just come out of darkness into light. Now, her son stood vindicated — not a foreigner, but a citizen, a father, and a man free to dream again.

Matleb’s story is not an exception — it is a window into the lives of countless Indians caught in the storm of suspicion and statelessness. His case underscores how easily the poor can be branded as outsiders in their own land — and how community-led legal action can restore rights, dignity, and hope.

CJP Team Assam with Matleb Ali, outside his home

Thanks to the determined efforts of CJP, Matleb Ali’s name has been cleared. He is no longer just a “case” — he is a citizen of India.

The complete order may be read below.

Related:

From Detention to Deportation: The mass deportations and detention crisis at Assam’s Matia centre

Restoring Citizenship, Rebuilding Lives: CJP continues its journey in Assam

“Anti-conversion laws being weaponised”: CJP seeks interim relief against misuse of anti-conversion laws

The post Matleb Ali declared Indian by Tribunal, ending a long fight to prove his identity appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The lawsuit was a SLAPP suit – a legal tactic used to silence critical reports and public debate. This case and several other such cases highlight the growing use of lawfare to threaten and silence media, especially independent media. Akshay Luhadia and Istela Jameel in their report, Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation in India –An Analysis in the Context of Indian Defamation Laws, published in the NLIU Law Review discuss the threats to free speech and expressions in democracies through Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP). They highlight examples of SLAPP cases in India and the negative impact on democracy, particularly targeting minorities and women. Read their report here.

Statement on Vantara’s failed legal case against Himal Southasian

The post Vantara case against Himal Southasian dismissed by Delhi High Court appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It has been more than 75 years since the founding fathers (and mothers) of the Constitution took this bold stand when they were shaping the guidelines around which the newly independent country would move forward. A cursory glance at the constitutional debates makes it abundantly clear that a majority of the members – despite their own religious inclination – were clearly of the opinion that schools, whose basic purpose was to open minds of children and not make them a dumping ground of useless information, should never be opened up for any type of religious instruction.

What was important was that they were seeing the perils of poisoning of minds by religious frenzy in this part of the sub-continent, and were keen that the future of independent India should be secured on secular grounds only.

Perhaps it needs emphasising that Article 28 of the Constitution makes it more explicit and does not leave any ambiguity as far its implementation is concerned.

“No person attending any educational institution recognised by the state or receiving aid out of state funds shall be required to take part in any religious instruction that may be imparted in such institution or to attend any religious worship that may be conducted in such institution or in any premises attached thereto unless such person or, if such person is a minor, his guardian has given his consent thereto cultural and educational rights.”

What Does One Mean by Religious Instruction?

The expression religious instruction here has a restricted meaning. It conveys that teaching of customs, ways of worships, practices or rituals cannot be allowed in educational institutions wholly maintained out of State funds.

Much water has flown down the Ganges, the Jamuna and all rivers of the country and it appears that slowly, but not so silently, attempts are on to water down the provisions of this Article and facilitating religious instruction in government schools through the back door.

The manner in which Yogi Adityanath-led Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government in Uttar Pradesh has suddenly decided to hold summer workshops on the Ramayana and the Vedas in government schools across the state, without any broader consultation with the stakeholders involved in this endeavour, is symptomatic of the brazen attitude of the government. We are told that these workshops will be organised under the aegis of the International Ramayana and Vedic Research Institute, Ayodhya, and will include activities, like Ramlila, Ramcharitmanas recitation, Vedic chanting, painting, and mask-making.

As expected, this retrograde move by the Yogi government has generated anger among the broad masses as well as concerned citizens, who have demanded that this move be immediately rescinded.

Broadly they have three big objections:

– One, it clearly goes against the provisions of Article 28 of the Constitution and thus is a violation of constitutional principles and values.

– Two, in a state where people of different faiths have been living together for centuries together – giving primacy to the religion of the majority – will be an act of overt discrimination against all religious minorities, including those handful of students who are atheists.

– Three, such workshops will reinforce the deep-rooted gender and caste discrimination in these scriptures.

The resistance to this move has taken two forms. On the one hand, concerned citizens or political leaders have condemned these attempts as a violation of the Constitution. Leaders like Chandrashekhar ‘Ravan’ of the Bhim Army, also a Lok Sabha MP, has even suggested that if at all the government wants to organise workshops, they should be focused on the Constitution.

Secondly, courts have been approached at various levels with pleas that they condemn such moves and help strengthen the struggle for constitutional values and principles.

One such petition is not only aimed at “[s]afeguarding constitutional values but also at ensuring that our education system remains inclusive, secular, and scientific”. It demands quashing of the orders dated May 5 and May 8, 2025, and seeks following relief.

• Directing authorities to refrain from promoting specific religious texts in schools.

• Ensuring that education remains inclusive, secular, and scientific.

• Stop this act of overt discrimination which sanctifies and legitimises gender and caste discrimination.

The petition also explains why this order of the Yogi government is unconstitutional and harmful to society for the following reasons:

One, such an order violates secularism. Everybody knows that the Constitution recognises secularism as a fundamental feature (S.R. Bommai vs. Union of India, 1994). Mandating Ramcharitmanas and Vedas, which are Hindu religious texts, in public schools promotes a specific religion. This violates Article 28(1) of the Constitution, which prohibits religious instruction in State-run schools.

In Aruna Roy vs.Union of India (2002), the Supreme Court clarified that while comparative study of religions in a secular context is permissible, promoting a single religion’s text is unconstitutional.

Two, such orders promote caste and gender discrimination:

Certain verses in Ramcharitmanas, such as “Dhol, gawar, shudra, pashu, nari, ye sab tadan ke adhikari” (Sunderkand, 58.3) and “Nari swatantra na bhave, pati bina dukh pave” (Ayodhyakand,

60), demean Shudras and women. These verses contradict Article 14 (equality before the law), Article 15 (prohibition of discrimination), and Article 17 (abolition of untouchability) of the Constitution. Promoting such texts in schools not only violates the rights of Scheduled Castes and women but also undermines social equality.

Three, it facilitates attacks on scientific temper: Article 51A(h) of the Constitution imposes a duty on every citizen to promote scientific temper, humanism, and the spirit of inquiry and reform. Prioritising religious and mythological texts, such as the Ramayana and the Vedas weakens rational thinking and scientific inquiry.

In Santosh Kumar vs. Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development (1994), the Supreme Court stated that education must promote a scientific and rational outlook, not religious superstition.

Four, promote violation of minority rights: Articles 29 and 30 grant minorities the right to preserve their culture and educational autonomy. Mandating Ramcharitmanas imposes a Hindu-centric culture on students from Muslim, Christian, Sikh, and other minority communities, violating their cultural and religious rights (St. Xavier’s College v. State of Gujarat, 1974).

Five, administrative impropriety. This impropriety can be understood in the way an institute under the culture department issued orders directly to officials of the education department, which is a violation of administrative protocols.

The way the Supreme Court emphasised in the U.P Gangadharan vs. State of Kerala (2006)case that administrative actions must follow established protocols. Since the said order has been issued without consultation with the education department, it is illegal and arbitrary.

It is also no small matter that the move facilitates misuse of public funds. Article 27 prohibits the use of taxpayer money to promote any particular religion. The use of public funds for these workshops, such as for teacher training and materials, promotes Hindu religious values, which is against the ruling in Prafull Goradia vs. Union of India (2011) and also displays lack of constitutional morality. We should not forget that in the case of Indian Young Lawyers Association vs. State of Kerala (2018), the Supreme Court defined constitutional morality as adherence to principles of equality, liberty, and justice. Promoting caste and gender hierarchies of Ramcharitmanas contradicts these values.

There is nothing surprising about this move by the Yogi government which, as the petition well explains, is a clear “violation of Constitution”. Remember, with the ascent of BJP at the Centre (in 2014), many states opened up various ways and means in which a particular religion — namely Hindu religion — is overtly or covertly promoted.

Take this news item where neighbouring Madhya Pradesh has already introduced Hindu religious texts as part of the curriculum of State government schools. A few years ago, the then BJP government in Rajasthan had come under the scanner of civil liberty activists and educationists for its controversial move to bring Saints-Mahatmas in government schools. It is now history how the Haryana government had decided to include the Bhagwad Gita in the school curriculum, merely a year after Prime Minister Narendra Modi brought his party, the BJP, to power at the Centre.

Such moves, which seem to violate constitutional principles and values, are, in fact, a reinforcement of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh or RSS-BJP’s tremendous discomfort with the Constitution itself. It is now history when the Constituent Assembly adopted the draft of the Constitution in November 1949, within three days after its adoption, an editorial in the Organiser (RSS mouthpiece) criticised it in no uncertain terms and praised Manusmriti: [Excerpts from an Editorial on Constitution, Organiser, November 30, 1949). The Hindutva Supremacist movement was praising Manusmriti and counterposing it with the newly adopted Constitution. Another stalwart of the Hindutva movement, Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, similarly lambasted the draft of the Constitution and emphasised that Manusmriti should have been made the basis of Indian laws.

What is worth emphasising here is that there are various judgements/interventions of the courts at the highest level itself which have been categorical in cautioning the executive about bringing in religious instructions in schools.

Take the case of a petition filed by a lawyer Vinayak Shah from Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, in the Supreme Court. It has challenged the recitation of Sanskrit prayers in Kendriya Vidyalayas. According to him, doing so effectively amounts to “religious instructions for schools funded by the government”. This, Shah has argued, violates Article 28(3) of the Constitution, which says that nobody attending educational institutions recognised by the State or those which receive aid out of State funds, shall be required to take part in any religious instruction or religious worship in institutions or premises attached to them—unless they are minors and their guardian has consented to it.

This petition revolves around three issues:

One, it is not right to compel children of all religions, including those from families that are atheist and agnostic, to sing Hindu prayers.

Two, considering the constitutional prohibition on students being made to take religious instruction in government-funded schools, the 1,100 Kendriya Vidyalayas must not insist on holding such prayer meetings every day.

Three, prayer songs obstruct the development of a scientific temper in students, which in turn Violates Article 51A(h) of the Constitution that says that it shall be the duty of every citizen to develop a scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform.

Considering the seminal importance of this issue, a bench led by Justice Rohinton Nariman and Justice Vineet Saran have referred the matter to the Chief Justice of India to be examined by a Constitutional Bench comprising at least five judges.

One can also look at a case from Maharashtra where Sanjay Salve, a teacher at a Nashik school had waged a lonely struggle against the management of a school that had refused to give him a raise for he had refused to fold hands during school prayers. Salve approached the courts asking that his right to freedom of expression be protected. He said that he cannot be forced to stand with folded hands during prayers and that singing of prayers amounts to imparting religious education, not permissible under Article 28(1) of the Constitution.

A two-member bench of the Bombay High Court had ruled in his favour, saying that “forcing a teacher to do so [fold hands during prayers] will be a violation of the fundamental rights.

One can also refer to how the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT), tasked to assist and advise Central and state governments over school education, shared a manual on sensitising schools to the needs of minority students.

A point worth contemplation in view of the Yogi government’s order is that whether educational institutions can compel students to have religious instruction under the name of moral education, as many such orders are couched in the language of teaching “value” to the students.

Perhaps the draft committee of the Constitution, chaired by B R Ambedkar, was aware of this possibility and had made it explicit that any such act would be a violation of Article 19, which gives the right to freedom of expression to every citizen and its violation would be, in fact, a violation of Article 25(1). It says:

“Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice and propagate religion.”

Looking back, one can see the progressive nature of these various articles in the Constitution, instituted by a draft committee — majority of whom were believers and hardly a few who were declared atheists — who were keen that no matter what it takes, schools administered by State funds should never be allowed to give religious instruction in any form. May be after witnessing the Partition of the country, where religion was used as a basis of nationhood by a significant section of the population and which witnessed tremendous bloodletting, they could foresee the importance of keeping religion restricted to one’s private domain.

Whether Yogi government will be allowed to have its way and thus further facilitate dilution of Constitutional principles – with its controversial order of organising Ramayana and Vedic workshops in government schools of UP — is the key question before us today!

Either way, the battle to save the Constitution will continue unabated.

The writer is a senior independent journalist. The views are personal.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post UP: Ramayana, Vedic Workshops in Govt Schools Challenged appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It stands in sharp contrast to how India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru intervened to get a scholarship for a young Irfan Habib in spite of the fact that he was member of communist party, faced some penal action from the Aligarh Muslim University for his activities.

The present case of shocking police action against Mahmudabad – putting him behind bars on very grave charges – over his posts needs a close look before putting it in the historical context of how Nehru helped Habib, who would go on to become a famous historian in the future.

Ali Khan Mahmudabad’s Facebook post

Mahmudabad, a young, bright and brilliant academic, was arrested by Haryana police on the grounds that his Facebook post on Operation Sindoor (conducted by Indian Army to deal with the threat of terrorism from Pakistan) among others, incited rebellion and hurt religious feelings.

Mahmudabad remarked in his post that the press briefings on Operation Sindoor conducted by colonel Sofiya Qureshi and wing commander Vyomika Singh were important and constituted good optics. While noting with satisfaction that many right wing commentators applauded colonel Qureshi, he boldly spelt out his concerns that the “optics” could be counted as “hypocrisy” if those commentors, in their role as Indian citizens failed in demanding equally loudly, the protection of “ the victims of mob lynchings, arbitrary bulldozing and others who are victims of the BJP’s hate mongering”.

He also referred to the example of a prominent Muslim politician who said “Pakistan Murdabad” and was trolled by Pakistanis and applauded by Indian right wing commentators hailing him as “our mulla”. “Of course this is funny” remarked Mahmudabad and observed with sadness “but it also points to just how deep communalism has managed to infect the Indian body politic.”

However, he displayed optimism that the press conference addressed by colonel Qureshi and wing commander Singh offered him a fleeting glimpse of, what he said, “to an India that defied the logic on which Pakistan was built”. “As I said,” he said, “the grassroots reality that common Muslims face is different from what the government tried to show but at the same time the press conference shows that an India, united it its diversity, is not completely dead as an idea.”

It is preposterous to think that what he wrote pointed to sedition or attempts to stoke enmity among people professing diverse faiths. The arrest of professor Ali Khan is an example of State action egregiously violating the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of expression and rule of law.

Nehru on Irfan Habib

It is against this sordid backdrop that we may recall how seventy years back in 1955, Nehru intervened to get a scholarship for Irfan Habib, now a renowned historian. Nehru’s intervention was warranted because the Home Ministry had raised objections owing to the fact that Habib was a member of the Communist Party.

Following Zakir Hussain’s pleadings that Habib should be helped Nehru met him. In the letter to Zakir Hussain, Nehru wrote that Habib was a Member of Communist party and the government scholarship should not be given to someone who might use it to study and later act against the State.

“No State,” Nehru wrote, “ could be expected to go out of its way to give a scholarship to a person on whom it could not rely or who was likely to indulge in activities which were harmful to the State”.

It is instructive that Nehru in that letter described Irfan and his comrades as Jesuits and he wrote that they belonged “… to the strict order and not over-scrupulous in their dealings with others, provided they carry out the dictates of that order to whom they owe their basic loyalty”.

“I see no reason why Government should go out of its way to offer a scholarship to a person who is so tied up with an order of this kind, whether it is the communist party or some other,” Nehru sharply noted.

However, while he did make those remarks, Nehru also showed his statesmanship and wrote, “I recognise, of course, that one must not judge young people too strictly and youthful enthusiasm must not be ignored. Probably, with some greater experience, one grows out of these immature grooves of thought and action”.

In the end, he advised the Ministry of Education to give scholarship to Habib with the remarks that “…. he is a young man of intelligence and, I believe, integrity and both these qualities will no doubt influence his future growth.”

Modi regime criminalising dissent

Seventy years after Nehru displayed his liberality while dealing with a young dissenting academic like Habib and granted him a scholarship, a young professor like Mahmudabad is being put behind bars for his Facebook post which is full of constructive crticisim rooted in idea of India. Eventually Mahmudabad will triumph because in his own words, “India, united in its diversity, is not completely dead as an idea.”

S N Sahu served as Officer on Special Duty to former President of India K.R. Narayanan.

Courtesy: The Wire

The post In Contrast: Nehru’s Take on a Young, Dissenting Irfan Habib and the Modi Govt’s Treatment of Mahmudabad appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Detailing further, the press release states that the news report dated  May 20, 2025 regarding the arrest and remand to custody of a Professor of Ashoka University (a deemed to be University) in Haryana contains a gist of the allegations on the basis of which he has been arrested, discloses, prima facie, that the human rights and liberty of the said Professor have been violated. Therefore, it has deemed it to be a fit case for taking suo motu cognisance of the reported incident.

Accordingly, it has issued a notice to the Director General of Police. Haryana, calling for a detailed report in the matter within one week.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has today granted interim bail to Professor Mahmudabad.

Related:

SC: Interim bail granted to professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad; SIT to probe posts on Operation Sindoor

How high is the price of criticism? Professor Mahmudabad arrested for his criticism of politics of hatred

The post NHRC, India takes suo motu cognisance of a media report regarding the arrest and remand to custody of a Professor of Ashoka University in Haryana, issues notice to DGP Haryana appeared first on SabrangIndia.

However, the Court refused to stay the investigation, reported LiveLaw. Moreover, the Court also directed the Haryana DGP to constitute a Special Investigation Team comprising senior IPS officers, who do not belong to Haryana or Delhi, to investigate and understand the true meaning of the post. One officer of the SIT should be a woman. The SIT should be constituted within 24 hours, stated the court. The SIT should be headed by an IG rank officer and the other two members must be of SP rank. The matter will now be heard on Friday.

#BREAKING| SC Refuses to stay investigation against @AshokaUniv Professor

SC : having regard to two online posts have led to FIR registration, we are satisfied that NO CASE OF STAYING THE INVESTIGATION IS MADE OUT . But to have understanding of the propensity of the word use,…

— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) May 21, 2025

Imposing some conditions for grant of interim bail, the Court restrained Ali Khan Mahmudabad from writing any posts or articles in relation to the social media posts which are subject matter of the case or from expressing any opinion in relation to the terrorist attack on Indian soil or the counter-response given by India. The Court also directed him to join and fully cooperate with the investigation. He has been directed to surrender his passport. The bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice NK Singh clarified that the interim bail has been granted to facilitate further investigation.

After the order was dictated, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, for the petitioner, requested the Court to restrain the registration of further FIRs on the same issue. “Nothing will happen,” Justice Kant orally said. Justice Kant orally asked the State of Haryana to ensure that. The State was granted liberty to place on record any further incriminating materials they discover during the course of the investigation.

Bench queries the petitioner’s posts during the hearing

At the outset, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, drew the bench’s attention to Mahmudabad’s comments posted on his Facebook and Instagram profiles. He read out the comments to the bench. “This is a highly patriotic statement,” Sibal said.

Referring to Mahmudabad’s comments about “right-wing commentators applauding Colonel Sofiya Qureshi” and his statement that right-wing commentators must equally express concerns for victims of mob lynching, bulldozing etc., Justice Kant said, “So after commenting about war, he turned to politics!”

“Everybody has a right to express free speech. But is it the time to talk of this much communal…? The country has faced a big challenge. Monsters came all the way and attacked our innocents. We were staying united. But at this juncture.. why to gain cheap popularity on this occasion?” Justice Kant remarked.

Sibal, agreeing that Mahmudabad’s comments could have waited till May 10, however, asked what was the criminality in his comments.

“Everybody talks about rights. As if the country for last 75 years was distributing rights!” Justice Kant said.

Petitioner’s comments ‘dog-whistling’, he should have used ‘neutral and respectful’ language : Justice Surya Kant

About the petitioner’s comments, Justice Kant said, “This is what we call in the law – dog whistling!””Some of the opinions are not offending to the nation as such. But while giving an opinion, if you….” Justice Kant said.

“When the choice of words is deliberately made to insult, humiliate or cause discomfort to other persons, the learned professor cannot have the lack of dictionary words…he could convey the very same feelings in a simple language without hurting others. Have some respect for the sentiments of others. Use simple and neutral kind of language, respecting others” Justice Kant said.

Sibal said that the comments had no “criminal intent”. He highlighted that the petitioner said that the press briefing of Operation Sindoor showed that the logic on which Pakistan was built has failed, and that the post ended with “Jai Hind.” He also added that the petitioner’s wife is nine months pregnant and expecting child delivery soon.

Justice Kant asked Additional Solicitor General SV Raju, representing the State of Haryana, if the comments had the effect of insulting women army officers. Justice Kant said that the bona fides of the comment was a subject matter of investigation. “The entire projection is that he is anti-War, saying families of army people, civilian in border areas etc., suffer. But some words have double meaning also.,” he said.

ASG Raju said that the post was not as innocent as projected by Sibal

On May 20, a local court in Sonepat, Haryana sent Mahmudabad to judicial custody. While so ordering, the court rejected the State Police’s request for his 7-day custody. On May 18, the Magistrate had remanded the Professor to police custody for two days.

Mahmudabad has been charged with offences under Section 196, 152 etc., of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), inter alia, pertaining to acts prejudicial to maintaining communal harmony, making assertions likely to cause disharmony, acts endangering national sovereignty and words or gestures intended to insult a woman’s modesty. He has also been summoned by the Haryana State Commission For Women which is headed by Renu Bhatia.

Detailed Background

Dr. Ali Khan Mahmudabad, associate professor and head of the Political Science department at Ashoka University, was arrested on Sunday, May 18, in Delhi for his social media commentary on India’s recent military action dubbed Operation Sindoor. His arrest follows two First Information Reports (FIRs) filed in Haryana and stems from allegations of inciting secession, insulting religious beliefs, and undermining national unity.

The arrest was made based on complaints filed by Renu Bhatia, chairperson of the Haryana State Commission for Women, and Yogesh Jatheri, the village sarpanch of Jatheri and general secretary of the BJP Yuva Morcha in Haryana.

He was charged under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, including:

• Section 152– Act endangering the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India
• Section 353– Statements conducing to public mischief
• Section 79– Word, gesture, or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman
• Section 196(1)(b)– Promoting enmity between different groups on religious grounds
• Section 197(1)(c)– Assertions prejudicial to national integration
• Section 299– Malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings

According to Sonipat DCP (Crime) Narinder Kadian, Mahmudabad was produced before a local court and remanded to two days’ police custody for investigation.

Widespread support for professor Mahmudabad

Students and faculty of Ashoka University came forward in widespread support and solidarity against his arrest that has been widely criticised the country over. Fellow teachers and professors even maintained a vigil outside the police station ensuring that all medication etc reached the arrested academic in time.

SC order can be read here.

Related:

How high is the price of criticism? Professor Mahmudabad arrested for his criticism of politics of hatred

Singing Faiz’s ‘Hum Dekhenge’ is ‘Sedition’: Nagpur Police Book Organisers of Vira Sathidar Memorial

A Republic That Listens: The Supreme Court’s poetic defence of dissent through Imran Pratapgarhi judgment

The post SC: Interim bail granted to professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad; SIT to probe posts on Operation Sindoor appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In the immediate aftermath, a chilling new aspect emerged: terrorists reportedly demanded the religion of their victims before pointedly unleashing their violence against only those from the Hindu majority. This deeply disturbing report, amplified across social media, quickly fuelled a divisive narrative and a wave of online trolling against Kashmir and its Muslim residents.

Amidst the chaos, when death stared everyone in the face, the first heroic story that emerged was that of Syed Adil Hussain Shah, a brave local pony handler, unarmed and unprotected, who displayed a level of courage and humanity that stands unmatched. Adil Shah did not flee. He did not hide. Instead, he stepped forward to confront the attackers, questioned them for their inhumanity, and tried to shield two terrified tourists from Pune — Kaustubh Ganbote and Santosh Jagdale. In doing so, he was shot four times — twice in the chest, once in the abdomen, and another bullet tore through him elsewhere. He succumbed tohis injuries on the spot, his blood soaking the very earth he had guided thousands across, every day, with quiet pride and dignity.

Besides Adil who sacrificed his life, far removed from the sensationalised claims and buzzing news cycles that amplified the hate narrative, on ground, multiple accounts of unbridled solidarity and assistance towards the victim survivors unfolded. While the hysterical reporting on a vast majority of electronic media channels chose to ignore these accounts, these accounts of reassuring humanity, painted a starkly different picture. Despite the vitriol aimed at Kashmir and its people, the valley affirmed its unwavering commitment to peace, love, and harmony, showcasing the very essence of the hospitality for which it has long been celebrated.

When a native Kashmiri guy Sajad saves a young boy from a volley of gunfire in Pahalgam

A native Kashmiri, Sajad Bhat, emerged as a true beacon of courage amidst the chaos, bravely saving a young boy from the gunshots and gunfire in Pahalgam’s Baisaran area. This local hero instinctively carried an injured tourist down to safety on his back after the attack.

जब गोलियों की आवाज़ से पहलगाम थर्रा उठा, तब एक कश्मीरी युवक ने घायल की मदद कर दिखाया कि मानवता ज़िंदा है।#Pahalgam #kashmirattack pic.twitter.com/PI2bSuLTG6

— Lallanpost (@Lallanpost) April 23, 2025

A scene of selfless rescue

Sajad Bhat, who unhesitatingly risked his own life, later recounted the harrowing experience and the immediate, collective response from the local community. Describing the frantic efforts to save lives, he explained: “Baisaran Valley is a very large valley. When we saw the injured there, our first priority was how to safely get them to the hospital and help them. Many horsemen also carried them on horseback to the hospital,” he explained, painting a picture of a spontaneous, collective effort.

#Watch: Meet #SajadBhat, a local who carried an injured tourist down to safety on his back after the #Pahalgam attack pic.twitter.com/VcT1fUAbdS

— Greater Kashmir (@GreaterKashmir) April 24, 2025

Saw a child who was pleading, ‘uncle, uncle! save me, save me!’: Bhat

He further detailed his own harrowing rescue of a child. He said that “Besides me, there were many others who carried them on their shoulders to get them to the hospital. I also saw a child who was calling out, ‘Uncle, Uncle!’ He was pleading, ‘Save me, save me!’ I directly put my life at risk, lifted him onto my shoulders, and took him straight to the hospital. On the way, I reassured him constantly, telling him not to be afraid, that nothing would happen to him here. I gave him water on the way and took him directly to the hospital.”

Sajad Bhat firmly stated that it’s the inherent responsibility of locals to aid the injured. When speaking about the injured civilians, he clarified, “I wasn’t there when the initial incident happened. We reached there later for the rescue. It’s our duty, the duty of the locals here, to go there and help the injured.”

A plea for humanity and peace: ‘we stand with you, don’t be afraid; please come to Kashmir

Recalling the horrific scene, Bhat described, “It was a terrifying sight. We too were scared in our places, wondering what was happening. No one was visible; some tourists and some horsemen were wandering around, trying to save people.”

He didn’t shy away from emphasising the profound gravity of the situation, stating with deep emotion, “Our intention is that humanity has been murdered; the entire Kashmiri people have been murdered. This should not happen; this should never happen.”

In a heartfelt plea, Bhat earnestly requested, “We just request that you don’t be afraid. Please come; you are our guests; you are our brothers. We stand with you. Don’t be afraid; please come to Kashmir.”

#Pahalgamattack: #SajadBhat, #Kashmiri hawker whose video of helping victims went viral pic.twitter.com/fF1aNrLm1E

— The Tribune (@thetribunechd) May 2, 2025

When a Hindu man rescued Maulvi and Madrassa student in Poonch amidst bombing

In the aftermath of the cross-border shelling in Poonch, a remarkable story of interfaith unity and bravery emerged. Former BJP MLA Pardeep Sharma, 51, was hailed as a hero for transcending religious and political lines to rescue those affected.

As reported by India Today (IT), when mortar shells struck Jamia Zia Ul Uloom, a local madrassa housing over 1,200 students and operated by his childhood friend Sayyed Habib, Sharma immediately rushed to the scene.

A Hindu Man, a Madrasa, and a Lesson in Brotherhood from Poonch

Here’s a special conversation with the madarsa head Syed Habib and his friend Pradeep Sharma who saved Madarsa students#NewsToday #Poonch #Unity (@sardesairajdeep, @kamaljitsandhu) pic.twitter.com/HiHpO4tVk6

— IndiaToday (@IndiaToday) May 15, 2025

Friendship forged in crisis

Sharma’s actions were driven by a decades-old friendship with Sayyed Habib, forged when they first met in Class 9 at Poonch Government School. Despite their divergent paths into religious leadership and politics, their bond remained strong.

IT reported that this enduring friendship brought them together again as shells rained down on several buildings across town. Viral videos captured Sharma carrying wounded children to safety, earning him the title of “guardian angel” among Poonch residents. The attack tragically claimed the life of a maulvi and injured three children.

Recalling the harrowing moments, Sharma stated, “The maulvi died in my arms. I tried to help by placing a cloth on his cheek, but he couldn’t be saved.” He added, “Then I rushed to save three children. The hospital was full, so I held on to them until a stretcher became available.” When urged to save himself, Sharma’s response was resolute: “I told them the shells weren’t meant for me. At least not today” as reported

With me were Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs—all working together to help: Sharma

Sharma profoundly underscored the collective spirit that permeated the scene, noting that “With me were Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs—all working together to help. In that moment, nothing else mattered but saving those kids.” Sayyed Habib echoed this sentiment, confirming, “I didn’t think twice. I called Pardeep bhai. I knew he’d come—and he did.” While Sharma tended to the injured, Sayyed oversaw the safety of over a thousand children.

If anyone sees religion during tragedy, there is no person worse than him: Sharma

Sharma emphasised the collective spirit at the scene, highlighting that “If anyone sees religion during tragedy, there is no person worse than him. When shells are falling and bullets are being fired and people are getting killed and injured and you talk of Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs and Christians, then you don’t have the right to live,” as Indian Express reported

Sharma was actively “on the roads” for four days with his team, assisting in shifting the injured to hospitals. He recounted being woken by his family during the shelling on the intervening night of May 6 and 7: “I could hear the loud explosions. I thought of doing something for the people caught in the crossfire to help them in this distressing situation.” He even used Facebook Live to urge people to stay indoors and remain alert, as Indian Express reported

Hindus, Muslims are helping each other; society must not be divided at any cost after Pahalgam: tourist Puja Jadhav

A tourist identified as Puja Jadhav, when vacationing in Kashmir, has publicly refuted the prevailing negative narratives concerning Muslims and Kashmiris. In a widely shared video, Jadhav stated, “I am here on vacation, and Hindus and Muslims are helping each other.”  She further emphasised the unity she witnessed, urging people not to allow societal divisions, especially in the wake of the recent Pahalgam attack.

The video gained significant traction after being shared by prominent figures, including former BSP MP Kunwar Danish Ali. His sharing of Puja Jadhav’s video further amplified her message, bringing it to a larger audience and challenging divisive rhetoric.

संदेश बहुत साफ़ है !!

हिंदू पर्यटक पूजा जाधव कह रही हैं कि भारतीय मुसलमानों और कश्मीरियों के खिलाफ़ जो बयानबाजी की जा रही है, वह गलत है।

“मैं यहाँ छुट्टी पर हूँ, हिंदू-मुस्लिम एक दूसरे की मदद कर रहे हैं। पहलगाम के बाद समाज को किसी भी कीमत पर विभाजित नहीं किया जाना चाहिए” pic.twitter.com/EJAP9hvmyp

— Kunwar Danish Ali (@KDanishAli) April 23, 2025

Candlelight vigil for terror victims by local Kashmiri residents

On the evening of April 22, the day of the terror attack itself, residents of Kashmir came together to hold a candlelight vigil in memory of the victims of the Pahalgam terror attack. The gathering reflected the community’s deep sorrow and strong condemnation of the cowardly act of violence.

Carrying banners and raising their voices, people demanded justice and an end to terrorism. The vigil highlighted the growing resolve among Kashmiris to stand against violence and support peace in the region. Local residents made it clear that terrorism has no place in their society.

VIDEO | J&K: Locals of Pahalgam hold candle march for terror attack victims demanding justice.

(Full video available on PTI Videos – https://t.co/n147TvrpG7) pic.twitter.com/F19rAK7tFf

— Press Trust of India (@PTI_News) April 22, 2025

The march served as a collective cry for justice, with participants vociferously demanding accountability for the perpetrators of these heinous acts. Banners and slogans echoed a singular message: an end to violence and the restoration of lasting peace in Kashmir. The community’s resolute stand underscores a deep-seated longing for security and a future free from the constant threat of terrorism, sending a clear message to authorities to expedite justice and ensure such tragedies are never repeated.

After about 100 people got into trouble local Adil Bhai supported us: tourist from Pune in Pahalgam

Another tourist from Pune, when in Pahalgam, shared her moving experience, vouching for the deep-rooted Hindu-Muslim unity in the region.

“After about 100 people got into trouble, local Adilbhai supported us, gave shelter, and arranged food for everyone” she recalled with gratitude.

Breaking
Another tourist from Pune in Pahalgam tells her story vouches for Hindu Muslim unity.

“ After about 100 people got into trouble local Adilbhai supported us, gave shelter and arranged food for everyone…”

When Hindus are in trouble, Muslims are rushing to help.… pic.twitter.com/W8IOtw6ccR

— Priyamwada (@PriaINC) April 23, 2025

Adil, a local cab driver, emerged as a beacon of hope in a time of crisis. He welcomed a family from Maharashtra into his own home, offering them not just food and shelter, but a sense of security in a moment of fear and uncertainty. His actions spoke louder than any slogan or headline—acts of kindness that transcended religion and reminded everyone of our shared humanity.

“When Hindus are in trouble, Muslims are rushing to help,” she added, reflecting on the unity she witnessed first hand.

Adil himself humbly said, “One person made a mistake, but the whole of Kashmir will suffer the consequences. We do not support this. This is a murder of entire humanity.”

In a time when tensions threaten to divide, voices like Adil’s—and actions like his—stand as powerful reminders that the spirit of brotherhood is alive and well in Kashmir.

Kashmiri families open hearts & homes to tourist after Pahalgam attack

Similarly, many stories of fear and resilience surfaced—but some, like this one, reveal how moments of terror gave way to powerful human connection.

Rupali Patil, a tourist from Pune, shared how unsettling it was when the news first broke. “I was afraid to even step out of my hotel room,” she admitted. “But amid the chaos and confusion, I and many others found comfort in the homes of Kashmiris who took it upon themselves to protect us. Some even went out of their way to bring back people from our group who were stranded in other areas” as reported Times of India

Public figures have also recognised the overwhelming response of local Kashmiris in aiding victims. TMC MP Sagarika Ghose posted on X (formerly Twitter) and said that “At every stage during and after the Pahalgam terror attack, Kashmiris have rushed to help victims and families. A pony operator died trying to save others, Kashmiri families offered their homes, and many helped tourists flee the spot. The people of Kashmir are an integral part of our large Indian family. Terrorists want to drive us apart and spark anti-Kashmiri fury. We must not aid them in their evil agenda.”

At every stage during and after #PahalgamTerrorAttack Kashmiris have rushed to help victims & families. A pony operator died trying to save others, Kashmiri families offered their homes, Kashmiris helped families flee the spot. The people of Kashmir are an integral part of our… pic.twitter.com/i0xADivTdT

— Sagarika Ghose (@sagarikaghose) April 25, 2025

After the attack: a unified voice from Kashmir

In the aftermath of the tragic terrorist attack in Pahalgam, a powerful and unified voice rose from the heart of Kashmir. It wasn’t just about grief—it was about solidarity, resilience, and a reaffirmation of the values that truly define the region.

“This is what Kashmiris themselves said after the terrorist attack in Pahalgam,” one observer noted. Locals gathered, visibly shaken but united, and their words echoed far beyond the valley.

“Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Christian are brothers,” they declared with conviction—a reminder that communal harmony is not just a slogan here, but a lived reality, rooted in everyday relationships and shared experiences.

This is what Kashmiris themselves said after the terrorists attack in Pahalgam

They said
” Hindu Muslim Sikh Christians are Brothers ”

” We are Indians , India is ours ” ..
pic.twitter.com/ebEZD1j1OT

— Aryan Singh (@Call_mearyan) April 27, 2025

We are one, we stand united against terrorism: Kashmiris take a stand against terror

In yet another powerful display of unity and courage, local Kashmiri Muslims in Anantnag raised their voices loudly against the Pahalgam terror attack. Taking to the streets, they held a strong and heartfelt protest against terrorism, rejecting violence in all its forms.

ब्रेकिंग न्यूज़ !

अनंतनाग के स्थानीय कश्मीरी मुसलमानों ने पहलगाम हमले के खिलाफ़ उठाई आवाज़ – सड़कों पर उतरे, आतंकवाद के खिलाफ़ किया ज़बरदस्त प्रदर्शन !

यह है असली भारत – जहाँ धर्म नहीं, इंसानियत सबसे बड़ी पहचान है !

संघियों को ये तस्वीरें पसंद नहीं आएंगी,
गोदी मीडिया इसे… pic.twitter.com/BtEYTsSpa1

— Surbhi Maradiya (@SurabhiMaradiya) April 25, 2025

This is the real India—where religion does not divide, and humanity remains the highest identity.

These images may not sit well with certain ideological groups, and mainstream media might choose to ignore them—but the truth on the ground speaks louder than any narrative.

However, despite the divisive narratives that followed, the local Kashmiri community stood firm in its commitment to peace, love, and hospitality. Individuals like Sajad Bhat, who risked his life to save tourists, and interfaith heroes like Pardeep Sharma exemplified the region’s enduring spirit of solidarity, transcending religious and political differences. The stories of local residents offering shelter, care, and support to tourists in distress demonstrated that the true essence of Kashmir lies not in the headlines, but in the human connections that thrive in moments of crisis. As the people of Kashmir continue to unite against terror and hatred, they remind us that humanity and peace must always prevail, regardless of the forces that seek to divide.

Related:

Everyday Harmony: Kashmiri Pandits welcome back Hajis with Na’at recital

Unity over Division: Banke Bihari Temple stands firm against boycott of Muslim artisans

India’s Eid: rose petals & inter-faith unity shared joy paint India’s heart-warming harmony across the country

The post Pahalgam Attack: Kashmir unites in heroic resilience amid terror attack, proving humanity’s strength against hate narrative appeared first on SabrangIndia.

At the heart of the case lies a disturbing sequence of events: a young tribal man taken from his own wedding ceremony by police officers, subjected to alleged third-degree torture, and found dead in custody; followed by delayed and diluted FIR registration, an ambiguous post-mortem, and retaliatory criminal cases against the sole eyewitness. The State’s response—marked by delays, lack of arrests, and superficial disciplinary action—led the Court to conclude that the investigation was neither fair nor credible.

The judgment is a strong reaffirmation of the constitutional requirement for independent, impartial, and transparent investigation, especially when State agents are themselves under suspicion. It underscores the Supreme Court’s commitment to upholding due process, witness protection, and accountability in custodial deaths, while reinforcing that the rule of law cannot be compromised by institutional camaraderie.

Factual background

The case emerges from a gruesome incident of custodial torture that took place in July 2024. Deva Pardhi, a tribal man from Guna district, Madhya Pradesh, was preparing for his wedding. On July 13, while the Haldi ceremony was underway, a team of around 30–40 police personnel stormed the premises, assaulting family members—including women and children—and arresting Deva along with his uncle Gangaram Pardhi.

They were taken not to the new police station equipped with CCTV cameras but to an older facility, allegedly to avoid surveillance. At the station, both men were subjected to severe third-degree torture. According to Gangaram’s account, Deva was:

• Beaten with ropes,
• Doused with hot water, petrol, salt, and chili powder,
• Suspended upside down from the ceiling,
• Suffocated with water.

Eventually, after three hours of this treatment, Deva collapsed and was moved to a hospital where he was declared dead on arrival.

Delayed and diluted FIR: The family of the deceased attempted to register an FIR immediately, but were obstructed by the local police. Only after a Magisterial Inquiry was completed, was FIR No. 341/2024 registered—eight days later. Even then, crucially, the charge of culpable homicide amounting to murder (Section 302 IPC) was excluded, and less serious offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) were invoked:

• Section 105: Culpable homicide not amounting to murder,
• Section 115(2): Voluntarily causing hurt,
• Section 3(5): Joint criminal liability,
• Section 120: Voluntarily causing hurt to extort confession,
• Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Despite these charges, no arrest was made in eight months—a fact that became central to the Court’s conclusion of deliberate institutional shielding.

Eyewitness targeted: Gangaram Pardhi, the only eyewitness to Deva’s custodial torture and death, was illegally detained beyond 24 hours, remanded to custody, and then systematically implicated in at least four more criminal cases:

• FIR 247/2024 (Dharnawada),
• FIR 489/2023 (Dharnawada),
• FIR 434/2023 (Jaora),
• FIR 87/2023 (Chippabarod).

His bail plea was rejected by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, which, however, acknowledged the threat perception he faced and ordered his transfer from Guna District Jail to Gwalior Central Jail.

Medical evidence muzzled by influence: Post-mortem results revealed multiple abrasions and contusions. However, instead of ascribing cause of death to physical injuries, doctors later opined that Deva died of vasovagal shock leading to heart failure. The Court cast serious doubt on the credibility of this conclusion, noting that:

• The Medical Board failed to opine on cause of death despite clear injuries,
• The delay and change in findings suggested direct police interference.

This aspect was described as a symptom of a much broader institutional malaise, wherein even forensic medical systems are suborned by police influence.

Judicial censure from the bench during the April 29 hearing

The Supreme Court’s hearing on April 29, 2025, preceding the final judgment, was marked by a series of extraordinarily candid and stern oral observations by Justice Sandeep Mehta, laying bare the judicial frustration with the State’s apparent unwillingness to take decisive action against the police officials implicated in Deva Pardhi’s custodial death.

When Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati, representing the State of Madhya Pradesh, informed the bench that the two key officers had merely been transferred to line duty, Justice Mehta expressed serious displeasure, questioning the sincerity and seriousness of the State’s response. As per the report of LiveLaw, he criticised the administrative tokenism in lieu of criminal accountability, calling it a blatant instance of institutional favouritism.

““Great response to a case of custodial death! What better example of favouritism, shielding your own officers. Would you like yourself to be appointed as amicus or appointed on behalf of CBI to take over the case? Rather than representing the State police. Ridiculous and inhumane approach. Absolutely. Man dies in your custody and it takes you 10 months to lay hands on your own officers. Why did you send them to line duty? For what reason? Their complicity has been found true, why they are not been arrested?”

Justice Mehta went on to question the competence of the investigating authorities, emphasising that the State had failed to arrest even a single person despite the lapse of ten months since the incident. According to LiveLaw, he demanded to know under what provision of law the FIR had been registered and implied that the State’s conduct reflected a gross abdication of investigative duty.

“For the 10 months time you have not been able to arrest a single person. This reflects on your competence. What is the provision of law under which the FIR has been registered?”

When the State sought to justify the absence of arrests by citing that substances had been found in Deva’s body, Justice Mehta dismissed this as a crude attempt at a cover-up, further underlining the systemic efforts to derail the case.

“Can there be a better cover-up act?” Justice Mehta was noted as saying as per LiveLaw.

The Court also took strong exception to the postmortem report, which recorded no conclusive cause of death despite multiple injuries on Deva’s body. The bench described it as inexplicable and suspect, given the visible signs of torture. Justice Mehta lamented the persistent impunity for custodial violence, asserting that repeated judicial pronouncements had done little to deter such brutality.

“A 25-year-old boy killed by custodial violence and not a single injury on the body seen by the medical jurist? You say he died of a heart attack? Bruises all over the body. Sad state of affairs in this country that vice of custodial violence continues unabated despite repeated judgments by this Court, and offenders roam free. Horrendous. And you try to eliminate the sole witness.”

Witness vulnerability and the court’s reluctance to endanger Gangaram: The hearing also saw Advocate Payoshi Roy, appearing for Gangaram Pardhi, urge the Court to consider his bail application. She pointed out that Gangaram, the sole eyewitness to Deva’s death, continued to face relentless harassment by the police and was being falsely implicated in one case after another.

In response, Justice Mehta made a poignant and chilling observation, suggesting that while judicial custody was undesirable, it may ironically offer better protection than release, given the serious risk to Gangaram’s life if he were freed. His words starkly acknowledged the reality of extrajudicial killings and witness silencing:

“Presently, being in custody is better for your own health and safety. When he comes out, he is run over by a lorry and you won’t even know. It will be an accident and you will lose the single witness. Instance [like this] are not uncommon…We have even rejected bail petitions on grounds that there is a risk of the life of accused himself. It’s always better. You will see instances that the moment the accused came out on bail, he was eliminated by the other side. Don’t take that risk. Leave it to the Court,” Justice Mehta remarked, as per LiveLaw.

These remarks underscored the extraordinary vulnerability of witnesses in cases involving State actors, and served to justify the later directions issued in the final judgment for assigning responsibility to senior State officials for Gangaram’s safety.

Judicial assessment and findings in the judgment

The findings of the Court are among the most comprehensive judicial evaluations of systemic custodial abuse and the complicity of the State machinery in recent times. The Court made the following key observations:

1. Systemic failure to register and investigate FIR promptly

The Court noted that the victim’s family attempted to lodge an FIR immediately after the custodial death occurred. However, the local police actively prevented them from doing so, an action the Court regarded as a deliberate suppression of lawful process.

Only after the Magisterial Inquiry concluded was FIR No. 341 of 2024 registered. Even then, it included Section 105 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) rather than Section 302 (murder), thereby diluting the gravity of the offence.

This delay and selective invocation of penal provisions formed a crucial part of the Court’s reasoning that the investigation was neither independent nor fair. The Court termed this an engineered evasion of accountability.

“The victims’ family tried to lodge the FIR immediately after the incident, but the local police officials prevented them from doing so. It is only after the magisterial inquiry was conducted that the FIR came to be registered wherein the offence of culpable homicide amounting to murder was omitted.” (Para 29)

2. Absolute Inaction for Eight Months: No arrests despite direct incrimination

The Supreme Court expressed deep concern that even after eight months, not a single police officer had been arrested despite the fact that the Magisterial Inquiry, medical evidence, and witness statements pointed toward clear custodial torture leading to death.

“Nearly eight months have passed since the FIR was registered but till date, not a single accused has been arrested.” (Para 29)

This inaction, according to the Court, was not accidental but a result of institutional camaraderie—a refusal to act against colleagues, even in the face of overwhelming evidence. The Court emphasised that the deliberate delay had the effect of sabotaging the prosecution and undermining public confidence in the legal system.

“These circumstances give rise to a clear inference that the investigation by the local police is not being carried out in a fair and transparent manner and there is an imminent possibility of the prosecution being subjugated by the accused if the investigation is left in the hands of the State police, who are apparently shielding their own fellow policemen owing to the camaraderie.” (Para 30)

3. Suppression and tampering of medical evidence

The post-mortem report, although documenting multiple contusions, abrasions, and visible injuries, made no conclusive finding on the cause of death. Instead, the medical board reserved opinion, and later attributed the death to “vasovagal shock leading to heart attack.”

The Supreme Court found this explanation medically implausible given the physical injuries and the timeline of events, and strongly suspected that the Medical Board was pressurised by the accused police officers. The doctors’ refusal to comment on the cause of death, in the Court’s view, reflected coercive interference by the police.

“The fact that the police officials have influenced the investigation right from the beginning is amply borne out from the circumstance that even the doctors, who conducted autopsy of the dead body of Deva Pardhi, seem to have been pressurised/influenced.” (Para 28)

“We are constrained to observe that despite taking note of the large number of the injuries on the body of Deva Pardhi, the victim of custodial torture, the members of the Medical Board which conducted post-mortem on his body, failed to express any opinion regarding the cause of his death. This omission seems to be deliberate rather unintentional and appears to be a direct result of influence being exercised by the local police officials.” (Para 29)

This finding is especially significant as it suggests institutional rot beyond the police force, implicating the medical system’s integrity in custodial death investigations.

4. Clear Credibility Crisis: Invoking Nemo Judex in Causa Sua

The Court invoked the foundational principle of natural justice — nemo judex in causa sua — which means that no one can be a judge in his own cause.

Given that the very individuals being investigated belonged to the same force tasked with investigating, the Court declared that any semblance of impartiality was fatally compromised. This foundational breach of investigative independence, in the Court’s eyes, necessitated transfer to the CBI.

“We are, therefore, convinced that this is a classic case warranting invocation of the Latin maxim ‘nemo judex in causa sua’ which means that ‘no one should be a judge in his own cause’. The allegation of causing custodial death of Deva Pardhi is against the local police officials of Myana Police Station.” (Para 28)

5. Credible eyewitness testimony consistently ignored

The Court gave great evidentiary weight to the statement of Gangaram Pardhi, who not only witnessed the torture of Deva Pardhi, but also tried to intervene, and was himself assaulted and illegally detained.

Despite being a direct, material eyewitness, Gangaram’s testimony had not triggered arrests, nor had it been treated with legal seriousness. Instead, he was subjected to retaliatory incarceration and implicated in multiple subsequent cases.

“The involvement of the police officials in the custodial death of Deva Pardhi is clearly borne out from the statement of the sole eye-witness Gangaram Pardhi and stands further corroborated during the magisterial inquiry.” (Para 29)

6. Retaliatory framing and judicial recognition of witness intimidation

The Supreme Court unambiguously held that multiple FIRs filed against Gangaram Pardhi after the custodial death incident were deliberate acts meant to silence and neutralise him.

The Court recognised a pattern of conduct: entangling him in successive, allegedly concocted cases to keep him detained indefinitely, cripple his morale, and deter him from deposing against the police.

“So far as the aspect of grant of bail to Gangaram Pardhi is concerned, we may observe that the underlying facts narrated supra clearly indicate that a deliberate attempt is being made to somehow or the other, implicate Gangaram Pardhi in multiple cases, one after the other, so as to keep him behind bars indefinitely, and break his spirit and the spirit of his family members thereby ensuring that the said person being the star witness of the custodial death of Deva Pardhi is not only demoralized but is also prevented from deposing against the errant police officials.” (Para 33)

Directions anchored in constitutional and criminal law doctrine

Based on these findings, the Supreme Court issued firm and time-bound directions:

• The investigation was immediately transferred to the CBI.
• CBI was ordered to register a Regular Case (RC) and complete investigation within 90 days of arrest.
• The accused police officers were to be arrested within one month.
• Protection of Gangaram under the Witness Protection Scheme was mandated.
• Liberty was granted to apply for bail in all cases, with the High Court directed to consider this Court’s findings.
• The Principal Secretary (Home) and Director General of Police, Madhya Pradesh were personally made responsible for ensuring Gangaram’s safety.

Significance and implications

This judgment is significant because it:

• Affirms Supreme Court’s role as a constitutional guardian under Articles 21 and 32 when State failure threatens liberty and life.
• Condemns the culture of custodial impunity, reinforcing that institutional allegiance cannot supersede justice.
• Clarifies that witness protection is not a procedural courtesy but a substantive right, especially when the witness is up against State forces.
• Lays down that transfer of investigation is not an affront to State police, but a necessity when bias taints the process.

Conclusion

The custodial death of Deva Pardhi is not merely a tragic event—it is a mirror held up to the systemic erosion of accountability in India’s criminal justice system. In transferring the case to the CBI and holding the State to account for its failures, the Supreme Court has emphatically reiterated that no State apparatus, however powerful, is above the Constitution. The judgment stands as a clarion call for legal reform, ethical policing, and the preservation of human dignity in custodial spaces.

The complete judgment may be read here.

Related:

“No One is Above the Law”: Supreme Court demotes Deputy Collector for demolishing a slum settlement by flouting HC order

FIR meant to fail: MP High Court calls out state’s attempt to shield BJP minister, in hate speech case, to monitor probe

A Republic That Listens: The Supreme Court’s poetic defence of dissent through Imran Pratapgarhi judgment

Not Fragile, Not Silent: SC chooses principle over punishment in response to BJP MP Dubey’s outburst, reasserts role as Constitutional check

The post “Shielding their own”: Supreme Court slams Madhya Pradesh police, transfers custodial death probe of a tribal man to CBI appeared first on SabrangIndia.

All references to Delhi Sultanate and Mughal rulers have been deleted from the S^tandard VII text book. In addition, in all other text books –wherever there are references to Muslim rule—has been deleted. What also stands deleted is the reference to Post-Mumbai (92-93 violence), post-Gujarat violence (2002), the references to Nathuram Godse being a trained pracharak of RSS, the ban on RSS in the aftermath of Gandhi murder (January 30, 1948),  among others. While the Kumbh Mela finds a place, deaths by stampede and other related tragedies like the Delhi station stampede have no place.

All this began during the Covid period when the pretext offered was reducing the burden on the students and followed by ‘rationalization’ which meant deletion of these portions which caused discomfort to the Hindu Nationalist ideology.

For the political purpose of demonisation of Muslims and spreading hate against them, Mughals have been presented as the  major villains in our history. Some earlier kings like Allauddin Khilji have also been on the hammer for the Hindutva narrative. Until now, the demonisation of Muslims was structured around the selective narrative of ‘temple destruction by Muslim kings’, propaganda which has been contested by rational historians. The spread of Islam by Muslims Kings using the sword was another part of this. This version is totally off the mark as conversions to Islam took place a century earlier, due to social interactions with Muslim Arab traders to begin with. In later years, many from the depressed castes embraced Islam to escape the tyranny of the caste system.

The ideology of Hindutva has gone to the extent of presenting this period as a dark period when a ‘Holocaust against Hindus’ took place. No doubt the era of Kingdoms is full of war for political reasons. Kings always wanted to expand their regime and in the process many people were killed. To call it holocaust is totally off the mark. Their (Hindutva) narrative actually takes off from the Communal Historiography introduced by the British to pursue the policy of ‘divide and rule’. In this; all the motives of Kings are related to religion and kings are presented as the symbol of the entire religious community.

Hindu communal historiography has taken this several steps further, by claiming that Muslims and Christians were ‘foreigners’ who have tormented Hindus. Muslim communal historiography presented the other side of the coin where Muslims are portrayed as perpetual rulers and Hindus as subjugated subjects. This presents Muslims as the logical rulers of this land.

The later trajectory of this logic did assist the British to divide our composite land into India and Pakistan. Savarkar articulated that there are two nations in this country, and Jinnah went on to demand a separate country for Muslims, Pakistan. Pakistan fell into the trap of Muslim communalism right from the word go and as far its textbooks are concerned they presented the beginning of Pakistan with Mohammad bin Kasim, only in the eighth century. Today their history books have totally deleted any reference to Hindu rulers. The hate which the Muslim communalism spread against the Hindus peaked with their school texts removing all the references to Hindu Kings and culture.

In a way India; during the last three decades has been walking on the footprints of Pakistan. The mirror image of Pakistan’s trajectory is being copied, down to the last comma. This point was highlighted by Pakistan’s poet Fahmida Riyaz. In the aftermath of Babri demolition she wrote “Arre Tum bhi Ham Jaise Nikale, Ab Tak Kahan Chhupe the bhai’ (Ohh! you have also turned out like us, where were you hiding so far).

Prior to Hindutva ideology coming to total control of Indian education, the RSS shakhas were spreading the communal version of society through multiple mechanisms like its Shakha bauddhis, Ekal Vidyalays, Shishu Mandirs. In due course mainstream media and social media also came to its service.

As such culture is a continuously evolving process. During the period of History under the hammer of Hindutva, serious social changes took place. Apart from the architecture, the food habits, dress and literature, the synthesis in the field of religion, the noble traditions of Bhakti and Sufi tradition developed. It was during this period that Sikhism came and flourished.

Now this political ideology may have to change the track. With Muslim rulers out of the way how will they demonise the Muslims now? Newer techniques may be on the way to substitute Aurangzeb or Babar; as now they will be defunct!

History is very central to the concept of Nationalism. Erich Fromm points out that ‘History is to Nationalism what poppy is to the opium addict’. Since BJP came to power as NDA in 1998, the major thing they did was what is called “saffronization of education”. Here history has been presented the narrative of glorious and brave Hindu Kings versus evil and aggressive Muslim kings. The charge has been that so far History has been written by Left Historians, who focused on Delhi rulers and who were pro Muslim. The point is that text books did present the details of particular dynasties depending on the historical length of their rule.

The history books in the decades of 1980s had a good deal of presentation of Hindu as well as Muslim kings. The narration was not revolving just around religion but the holistic view of communities was presented: trade, culture, literature among others.

Still it is true that ruler, ‘King centric history’ is not what we need to build our future. We need to focus on diverse sections of society, Dalits, women, adivasis and artisans who do not find much place in such narratives.

Related:

2025 NCERT Textbooks: Mughals, Delhi Sultanate out; ‘sacred geography’, Maha Kumbh in

Mughals Won’t Disappear From History Just Because Sangh Wishes so: Irfan Habib

The post Mughals deleted from curriculum: history as political tool appeared first on SabrangIndia.

At an event organised last week in memory of actor and activist Vira Sathidar, a group of young cultural activists sang the lyrics of Faiz’s famous Hum Dekhenge. The Nagpur police have now booked the organisers and the event’s speaker under Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which pertains to sedition, along with other sections of the BNS, including Section 196 (promoting enmity between groups) and Section 353 (statements conducive to public mischief).

Sathidar, an accomplished actor, prolific writer, journalist, and political thinker, died on April 13, 2021, after battling COVID-19 for over a week. Satidhar was also an Ambedkarite and the editor of Vidrohi magazine. Since his passing, his wife, Pushpa, is one of the organisers of the annual memorial. A committee was formed after Sathidar’s death under the name ‘Vira Sathidar Smruti Samanvay Samiti’ which has been instrumental in organising the annual event. This year, social activist Uttam Jagirdar was invited to speak. Although the FIR does not name individuals explicitly, it refers to the event’s organiser and speaker.

At the event organised on May 13 at the Vidarbha Sahitya Sangh, attended by over 150 people, Jagirdar talked about the contentious Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill, 2024. The  BJP-led state government is aggressively pushing to convert this bill into a law and implement it. Activists and academics believe this bill, if enacted, will lead to blatant violations of human rights and allow dissenting voices to be labeled “urban Naxals”.

The FIR, filed by one local Nagpur resident Dattatray Shirke, cites a news report aired on ABP Majha, a Marathi channel. The channel was likely the first to find issue in reciting Faiz’s poetry in India. In his complaint, Shirke claims, “At a time when the country valiantly fought Pakistani forces, the radical left in Nagpur were busy singing Pakistani poet Faiz Ahmed Faiz’s poem.

Shirke further claims that the line “Takht hilaane ki zaroorat hai (a need to shake the throne)” constitutes a direct threat to the government. However, while the FIR quotes the above line, the actual line in the poem is “sab takht giraye jayenge”. The poem was performed by young Mumbai-based cultural activists from Samata Kala Manch.

Despite an ongoing stay by the Supreme Court on the application of sedition charges, the Nagpur police have booked the organisers and speakers under the section. On May 11, 2022, the apex court had issued a historic order, staying all pending trials, appeals, and proceedings under section 124-A of the Indian Penal Code until the sedition law’s re-examination was complete. Since then, the BJP-led government has replaced the IPC with the BNS. However, the new law does not eliminate the sedition provision. Instead, the BNS introduces Section 152, which closely resembles the sedition law without explicitly using the word ‘sedition’.

Journalist arrested on same month

This is the second case this month in which the Nagpur police have targeted an individual’s freedom of expression. Earlier this month, a 26-year-old Kerala-based journalist, Rejaz M. Sheeba Sydeek, visiting Nagpur, was arrested for posting a photo of himself posing with two fake guns and opposing the Indian Army.

Initially investigated by the Nagpur city police and now handled by the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), Rejaz is accused of opposing Operation Sindoor – India’s military strikes against terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. The agency has also alleged that Rejaz has connections with banned organisations, including the Communist Party of India (Maoist), Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF), and Hizb-ul-Mujahideen. These banned organisations have radically different ideologies and the police have accused Rejaz of espousing ideologies of each of these banned groups.

Vira Sathidar’s endless protest

During his lifetime, Sathidar faced constant harassment from the police due to his political activism, keeping him under their radar. In a long interview with The Wire, months before his death, Sathidar had raised concern over the government’s tactics of employing new methods to control its citizens. For instance, while shooting for the film Court in 2013, the Gondia police arrived unannounced on the Mumbai set, searching for a “Naxal from Nagpur.” A year before his death, after raising issues against the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) headquarters in Nagpur, his house was raided by local police. During the raid, a sword was found, but local youths chased the police away.

In October 2020, when the NIA filed a supplementary chargesheet in the Elgar Parishad case, Sathidar’s name appeared among the so-called “urban Naxals,” a term loosely used by the Devendra Fadnavis-led government to target dissenters. Now, with the Maharashtra Special Public Security Bill, the state government seeks to formalise the term “urban Naxal” within the legal framework.

The government had made several attempts to criminalise Satidhar when he was alive and such efforts have seemingly continued even after his death.

Courtesy: The Wire

The post Singing Faiz’s ‘Hum Dekhenge’ is ‘Sedition’: Nagpur Police Book Organisers of Vira Sathidar Memorial appeared first on SabrangIndia.