Bhati, president of the Bharatiya Kisan Union (BR Ambedkar faction), has alleged that he was beaten with shoes, fists, kicks, belts and wooden sticks, while Jatav, the organisation’s Meerut district president, allegedly suffered similar treatment. Bhati was left with a heavily swollen eye and other visible injuries, as reported by The Wire.

A meeting with the SSP that allegedly turned into an assault

According to Bhati’s account, he and Jatav went to meet then-SSP Avinash Pandey on August 19. They were seeking relief in a case arising from protests held on July 8 over the murder of Lalita Gautam, a young Dalit woman from Meerut. Bhati has maintained that he was not present at the protest and wanted his name removed from the FIR connected with the demonstration. He said the two men had been trying to meet the SSP for several days and were eventually asked to come to his office.

Bhati alleged that the conversation quickly became hostile, with Pandey abusing him and questioning his credentials as a political and farmer leader. He said that when he objected to the alleged abuse, police personnel dragged him into another room. There, he alleged, the SSP assaulted him. Bhati has described being kicked, punched and beaten with shoes and a belt. He specifically alleged that Pandey kicked him around the eye several times after he fell to the floor.

The Indian Express, which spoke to Bhati, reported his allegation that he was assaulted for an extended period before he and Jatav were taken to the SOG office. Bhati also alleged that wooden planks and sticks were used against them and that the soles of their feet, backs and waist were beaten.

His visible injuries have become a central element of the controversy. Photographs showed substantial swelling around his eye, while videos released by Bhati showed him describing the alleged assault.

“मेरठ SSP के दफ्तर में किसी बात पर वाद विवाद हुआ। बात खराब हो गई, हिंसा का प्रयोग हुआ। सहारनपुर रेंज DIG से इस पूरे केस की जांच कराई जा रही है”

मेरठ में किसान नेता दिग्विजय भाटी की बर्बरता से पिटाई पर ADG भानु भास्कर ने कहा !! https://t.co/SCjEgECz3g pic.twitter.com/xeiUsdPHXc

— Sachin Gupta (@Sachingupta) August 21, 2026

Meerut police claims Samajwadi Party leader Digvijay Singh Bhati sustained the torture injuries after he fell from his scooty while returning from police office. https://t.co/7otICjnVLZ pic.twitter.com/e0TecnoXtc

— Piyush Rai (@Benarasiyaa) August 21, 2026

SSP kicked me in the eye multiple times, says Samajwadi party leader tortured in custody

Samajwadi party leader Digvijay Bhati claims he was brutally assaulted by Meerut SSP Avinash Pandey over Bhati’s involvement in a protest over murder of a Dalit girl. Later, he was taken to… pic.twitter.com/75JspJ8P09

— Piyush Rai (@Benarasiyaa) August 21, 2026

Spoke to Digvijay Bhati, who according to UP’s Meerut police, fell from a scooty while returning from police office. pic.twitter.com/tHyUhpEkmQ

— Piyush Rai (@Benarasiyaa) August 21, 2026

From the SSP office to the SOG office

Bhati has alleged that the incident did not end inside the SSP’s office. According to his account, the two men were subsequently taken by SOG personnel to another location. There, he alleged, their hands and legs were tied and they were beaten repeatedly with sticks and belts. He has described being punched around the head and temple and suffering repeated assaults. He further alleged that the men were denied ordinary dignity during the episode, including being given water in the cap of a bottle.

Perhaps the most disturbing allegation concerns their alleged humiliation after the physical assault. Bhati has alleged that police personnel played the Hindi film song “Choli Ke Peeche Kya Hai” and forced the two men to dance despite their physical condition. India Today reported the allegation that the two were forced to dance to the song, while The Indian Express also reported Bhati’s account of being humiliated after allegedly being beaten at the SOG office.

Jatav, meanwhile, has alleged that he was threatened with an encounter. Bhati has also claimed that the police threatened them with further consequences if they spoke about what had allegedly happened.

The police initially offered a dramatically different version

Meerut police initially rejected the allegations as “false and baseless”. According to the police version reported by The Wire, Bhati and Jatav had visited the police office in connection with an earlier FIR. The police claimed that the two subsequently fell from their scooter while returning home, sustaining the injuries visible in photographs. The police further said that the two men themselves submitted a written application concerning the incident, which was entered in the general diary at Civil Lines police station.

The controversy intensified when Avinash Pandey was transferred from his position as Meerut SSP on August 20 and attached to the DGP headquarters in Lucknow. Pandey was among nine IPS officers transferred in the reshuffle. Unlike officers who were given new district postings, he was attached to the state headquarters. Times of India reported that the transfer came amid the allegations of illegal detention and custodial torture.

The following day, Additional Director General of Police, Meerut Zone, Bhanu Bhaskar announced an inquiry. Saharanpur Range DIG Abhishek Singh was tasked with investigating the allegations and submitting a report. The police leadership initially described the incident more cautiously, saying that a dispute had arisen at the SSP’s office on August 19, after which violence allegedly took place. The case was therefore no longer simply an allegation made by two activists. It had become an official police inquiry.

Eight policemen sent to the lines; inspector suspended

The administration subsequently took further action. After taking charge, new Meerut SSP BBGTS Murthy ordered eight police personnel to be sent to the police lines, including Civil Lines SHO Akhilesh Gaur, two sub-inspectors and five constables. On August 23, Gaur was suspended. Times of India reported that the suspension was ordered on grounds including alleged negligence, apathy and arbitrary conduct in the discharge of his duties.

By August 25, reports indicated that Gaur had been suspended while the other personnel remained subject to administrative action, with the inquiry continuing. The investigating team has also begun examining the physical locations and documentary evidence. Navbharat Times reported that DIG Abhishek Singh inspected the relevant locations and examined CCTV footage and duty records, while questioning personnel connected with the allegations.

This controversy did not begin on August 19

The allegations against the police must also be viewed against the backdrop of what happened in Meerut in July. The entire chain of events goes back to the killing of Lalita Gautam, a 20-year-old Dalit student whose body was recovered in May after she went missing. Her death generated anger among Dalit groups and local residents, who questioned the police investigation and demanded that additional people allegedly connected with the crime be arrested.

On July 8, protesters gathered in Meerut demanding justice. The protest subsequently escalated, with police using force to disperse the demonstrators. Times of India reported that nearly 100 members of the Dalit community had gathered and that the confrontation escalated after protesters blocked roads and demanded that senior officials personally hear their grievances. A video from the confrontation also showed then-SSP Avinash Pandey repeatedly slapping a protester inside a police vehicle.

VIDEO: Meerut SSP Enters Police Van, Slaps Protest Detainee

Meerut SSP Avinash Pandey was seen entering a police custody vehicle and slapping a detainee during action taken after the Dalit community protest.

According to police, the detainee has been identified as Ravi Gautam,… pic.twitter.com/FLHa02gYSk

— Atulkrishan (@iAtulKrishan1) July 8, 2026

The police subsequently registered cases against protesters. According to Times of India, 13 people were named and around 50 others were booked on serious charges, including attempt to murder and allegations concerning women police personnel. Seven people were arrested and sent to judicial custody.

Those proceedings subsequently changed. On July 21, Times of India reported that serious non-bailable charges against the protesters had been dropped, following developments surrounding the case and intervention by the courts.

The July crackdown had also attracted the attention of the National Human Rights Commission. The NHRC sought an action-taken report from the Uttar Pradesh DGP and Home Secretary after a complaint alleged that Meerut police had used excessive force against protesters and caused serious injuries, reported The Hindu. Times of India reported that the Commission sought a detailed report within 15 days.

The ‘history-sheeter’ argument cannot answer allegations of torture

One of the most revealing aspects of the police response has been its emphasis on Bhati and Jatav’s criminal cases. Police have said that Bhati has several cases registered against him and that Jatav also has multiple cases. Bhati has disputed the circumstances and nature of several of these cases, saying many relate to protests and allegations arising from political activity. But even assuming every case cited by the police is genuine and pending, that does not resolve the central allegation. A criminal record, or a history sheet, does not authorise custodial violence.

Related:

Bihar: Not just Delhi, Patna, Siwan too saw brute police violence against demonstrating students: PUCL

The State Wants the Delete Button: India’s new architecture of digital censorship

When Suspicion Becomes Deportation: The case of Sahida Fakir and the dangerous criminalisation of Bengali identity

Supreme Court: UP Gangsters Act ‘stillborn’ for prescribing punishment without creating an offence

‘Wherever You Go, We are watching’: Second threat letter to Kashmiri Pandits

The post Inside the SSP’s Office: Allegations of beatings, torture & police impunity against farmer leaders in Meerut, UP appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The report’s first part, titled “Communal Polarisation in Mira Road,” was authored by Irfan Engineer and Neha Dabhade. Its second part, titled “Communal Tensions Surrounding Bakri Eid at Poonam Estate Cluster 1, Mira Road, Maharashtra, May 2026,” is based on fact-finding undertaken between May 30 and July 12, 2026. The second exercise was conducted by a team comprising Irfan Engineer, Director of CSSS; Sameer Wagle, member of the civil society initiative Mumbai for Peace; Rukmini Iyer, peacebuilder; and Sudhakar Suradkar, a retired IPS officer.

Taken together, the two parts offer a picture of a city suburb where disputes that may initially concern housing, public space, animals, religious practices or municipal regulation can rapidly acquire a communal character when political mobilisation, misinformation and outside intervention enter the picture.

From a growing suburb to a communally marked locality

The report begins by challenging simplistic understandings of Mira Road’s demographic composition. Mira Road emerged as a major residential destination as property prices in Mumbai increased and middle-class families, workers and young couples sought more affordable housing. Improved railway connectivity and the expansion of the real-estate sector accelerated this transformation.

But the report argues that the locality’s demographic evolution cannot be separated from the history of communal violence in Mumbai. Following the 1992–93 Bombay riots, substantial numbers of Muslim families from South Central and Central Mumbai moved towards Naya Nagar in Mira Road. At the same time, Hindu residents who acquired economic opportunities elsewhere gradually moved out. This produced the concentrated Muslim population that is now frequently described as a “ghetto”.

The 2011 Census figures cited in the report put Hindus at 68.96% of the population of Mira-Bhayander city and Muslims at approximately 16.28%. Christians constituted 6.01%, Jains 5.67%, Buddhists 1.86% and Sikhs 0.53%. Yet the report warns against treating Naya Nagar’s present demographic character as evidence of an inherently segregated or sectarian community.

Its founding story, in fact, was explicitly pluralist. Naya Nagar was established by Syed Nazar Hussain in 1979, who invited Shiv Sena founder Bal Thackeray and Indian Union Muslim League leader G.M. Banatwala to jointly inaugurate the colony. This occurred before the undivided Shiv Sena formally adopted Hindutva as its party ideology in 1985. Long-time residents interviewed for the report described decades of ordinary Hindu-Muslim coexistence.

The report does, however, document patterns of informal residential exclusion. Muslim residents reportedly face difficulties obtaining rental housing in the neighbouring Hindu-majority Shanti Nagar. It argues that the language of “ghettoisation” is itself unevenly applied: Muslim-majority neighbourhoods are frequently described as ghettos and subjected to heightened scrutiny, while exclusionary practices in Hindu-majority localities do not receive comparable treatment.

Communal politics and the electoral competition in Mira Road

The first part of the report places considerable emphasis on the role of political competition. It examines the trajectory of local legislator Geeta Jain, who contested the 2019 Assembly election as an independent candidate on a platform centred on development, women’s rights and employment. The report notes that she had earlier attempted to organise an Iftaar event using municipal funds.

Her political positioning subsequently changed significantly. By March 2023, Jain was participating in the flagging-off of a Hindu Jan Akrosh Morcha organised by Hindutva-affiliated groups. In January 2024, following the violence, she publicly stated that Hindus required only “five minutes” to demonstrate their numerical and physical superiority over Muslims.

The report places this transformation within the context of competition for the BJP ticket ahead of the 2024 elections. It points to other political actors employing increasingly prominent religious symbolism, including BJP district president Ravi Vyas, who inaugurated a replica of the Ayodhya temple in the constituency, and former legislator Narendra Mehta, who proposed a competing religious procession along a route substantially overlapping with an earlier Hindu Akrosh rally. The Shinde faction of the Shiv Sena also organised a motorcycle rally invoking the idea of Ram Rajya.

The report’s broader argument is that communal mobilisation increasingly became an electoral resource in an area where political competition was intense. The political consequences were followed by legal proceedings. A writ petition was filed before the Bombay High Court in March 2024 seeking action against Jain, BJP legislator Nitesh Rane and Telangana legislator T. Raja over alleged inflammatory speeches connected with the January violence.

The report records that the Bombay High Court subsequently directed police to examine recordings and transcripts of relevant speeches. Criminal cases were registered against Rane and Jain under provisions including Sections 153A, 153B, 143, 504 and 506 of the IPC, along with provisions of the Maharashtra Police Act.

Hate speech before the January 2024 violence

The report is particularly significant in its insistence that the January 2024 violence did not emerge from nowhere. It traces an escalating pattern of communal rhetoric to at least March 2023. At a March 12, 2023 rally organised by the Sakal Hindu Samaj, social media commentator Kajal Shingala, also known as “Kajal Hindustani,” called for an economic boycott of Muslims and made derogatory communal assertions. The report says she also made unsupported claims portraying Naya Nagar as a narcotics hub and made unsubstantiated claims concerning fertility-related harms allegedly caused by Muslim vendors. The speech was delivered in the presence of police officials and was followed by a citizen complaint. A case under Sections 153A and 505(2) was eventually registered.

Around a week later, a mass gathering addressed by spiritual figure Dhirendra Shastri saw assertions that Maharashtra would play a central role in the establishment of a “Hindu rashtra”. The report also records accounts from students and minors of recurring religiously motivated harassment during 2023, including pressure to recite religious slogans, intimidation in educational spaces and communal messages circulating in peer groups.

The significance of these episodes lies in the report’s larger thesis: communal violence is rarely an isolated eruption. It can follow a period in which language that marks one community as threatening, alien or economically undesirable becomes normalised.

CJP’s involvement: 2024

Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) has previously intervened in matters concerning communal tensions and the potential for provocative mobilisation in Mira-Bhayandar. In February 2024, CJP wrote to the Commissioner of Police, Mira-Bhayandar, expressing concern over the proposed visit and rally of BJP MLA T. Raja Singh in Mira Road. The intervention came against the backdrop of communal violence reported in the area in January 2024. Singh had announced a rally organised under the banner of the ‘Hindu Jan Aakrosh Morcha’ to mark the birth anniversary of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. After an earlier rally planned for February 19 was cancelled for want of police permission, a fresh announcement was made for February 25. CJP urged the police to carefully assess the proposed mobilisation and take steps to prevent any further deterioration of the law-and-order situation.

CJP’s detailed complaint may be read here

CJP again became involved in June 2026, when it assisted Sadique Basha, a senior CPI (M) leader from the Mira-Bhayandar region who has worked extensively on issues of communal harmony, in drafting a complaint to the police concerning events at Poonam Estate Cluster-1 in Mira Road in the period preceding Eid-ul-Adha. The complaint sought the registration of an FIR and a comprehensive investigation into allegations of communal provocation, intimidation, hate speech and other unlawful acts associated with the incident. In fact Sadique Basha is an activist who has campaigned at the time of the Covid-2019 crisis for access to public health and vaccines and also consistently for right to access to public education.

The complaint called upon the police to preserve and examine all available evidence, including CCTV recordings, mobile-phone videos, media footage and social-media material. It also sought the recording of statements of residents, eyewitnesses and others who had publicly spoken about the incident. Further, it urged the police to investigate the role of individuals and organisations allegedly involved in mobilising crowds, making inflammatory statements or otherwise contributing to communal provocation.

Importantly, the complaint emphasised that any investigation and subsequent legal action must be impartial and must not be influenced by political affiliation, organisational position or public standing. CJP called for appropriate action against anyone found to have violated the law.

The intervention reflected CJP’s broader position that maintaining communal peace cannot be limited to managing tensions after they have erupted. It also requires timely scrutiny of alleged acts of provocation, preservation of evidence and accountability for those responsible. A prompt, fair and impartial investigation, the complaint argued, is essential to reinforce the principle that attempts to generate communal hostility will be treated as matters of law and not merely as issues of public order.

Reconstructing the January 2024 violence

The report reconstructs the events of January 21–23, 2024 in considerable detail. On the night of January 21, at approximately 10.30 pm, a procession consisting of around four cars and ten two-wheelers, carrying saffron flags and equipped with a microphone, travelled through Naya Nagar.

According to police accounts cited in the report, the procession passed two mosques on Lodha Road while religious slogans were allegedly shouted. The vehicles then entered a dead-end lane containing another mosque. Residents, fearing an attempt to enter the mosque, confronted the procession. A confrontation followed, involving stones and physical altercation. Police intervention brought the immediate situation under control and five arrests were made. The following day coincided with the consecration of the Ram temple in Ayodhya, dramatically increasing the political significance of the incident.

BJP legislator Nitesh Rane posted a warning that there would be “strong reactions” to what had happened in Mira Road. At the same time, a media outlet described the previous night’s mob action as “jihadi” in a social-media post that reportedly received more than 800,000 views. Violence then spread beyond Naya Nagar.

In Shanti Nagar, shops identified as Muslim-owned were vandalised. According to residents interviewed for the report, some shops were targeted because of Muslim proprietor names or because they lacked saffron symbols. In Bhayander West, Jabir Siraj Ansari, an Ola-affiliated cab driver, was reportedly stopped, removed from his vehicle after his Muslim identity was established and beaten, sustaining multiple facial fractures. Another motorcyclist was identified as Muslim through a religious decal and was allegedly forced, under threat of violence, to recite a Hindu religious slogan. A Muslim-owned commercial tempo was also stopped by an armed group. The driver and another employee were injured, with the latter requiring stitches for a head wound. A mosque in Bhayander West was also reportedly subjected to stone throwing.

Detailed report on the incident may be read here, here and here.

Detailed reports on BJP MLA Raja Singh and his speech may be read  here, here, here and here.

Detailed reports on BJP MLAs Geeta Jain and Nitesh Rane may be read here and here.

The bulldozer action: when demolition followed communal violence

Perhaps the most contentious finding in the first part concerns the municipal demolition drive. On January 23, 2024, the Mira-Bhayander Municipal Corporation’s anti-encroachment division demolished structures in Naya Nagar. One proprietor who had operated an automobile repair business there for 22 years said he was physically removed from his premises immediately before demolition. He estimated his loss at between ₹5 lakh and ₹6 lakh and said authorities disregarded tenancy-related documentary evidence. A municipal official confirmed that the demolished structures were Muslim-owned but described the action as part of an enforcement drive against unauthorised construction.

Contemporary estimates cited in the report placed the number of demolished structures between 12 and 17. What generated particular concern was the timing. The demolition took place shortly after Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis demanded strict action against those responsible for the violence. Yet, according to the report, the structures demolished were exclusively identified as Muslim-owned, while no comparable immediate enforcement action was documented against Hindu participants in the violence.

Residents also questioned why structures that had allegedly existed for more than two decades were suddenly targeted immediately after the communal clashes. The report cites Amnesty International India, which criticised the demolitions as reflecting a discriminatory de facto policy of punitive demolition and called for due process and prosecution rather than collective punishment.

A troubling asymmetry in policing

The report’s analysis of police and criminal proceedings is among its strongest findings. It examined eight FIRs connected with the violence and found that in four cases where the complainant was Muslim, no arrests had been made at the time of review. More significantly, despite at least 22 Muslim-owned commercial establishments reportedly being vandalised during the three-day period, the report found that police had not registered a single FIR concerning those incidents at the time of its review.

The alleged assault on Jabir Ansari and the attack on the Muslim-owned transport vehicle also had not resulted in arrests in the weeks following the violence, despite victims reportedly assisting in the identification of assailants from circulating video footage. The disparity was also visible in the charges.

Muslim residents accused in connection with the January 21 confrontation were charged under Section 307 IPC — attempt to murder, carrying a maximum punishment of life imprisonment. The FIR reportedly attributed collective responsibility to a crowd of approximately 50–60 people without individualised allegations. By contrast, Hindu individuals implicated in attacks on the tempo driver and others were charged under provisions including Sections 141, 143, 147, 149, 324, 341 and 427, with a maximum punishment of three years.

The report does not claim that every accused person was innocent or guilty. Rather, it highlights the apparent difference in the treatment of comparable violence and asks whether the criminal justice response itself became communalised.

Two years later, another communal flashpoint

The second part of the report moves from the 2024 violence to Poonam Estate Cluster 1, where communal tensions erupted in May 2026 in the run-up to Bakri Eid. The immediate issue was the temporary keeping of goats within the residential complex. CSSS began its fact-finding on May 30 and continued the exercise through July 12. The team visited Poonam Cluster and interviewed residents, managing committee representatives, political and community representatives and a person who reported being assaulted.

The team also spoke to Nagnath Kamble, associated with the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal, met senior municipal and police officials and observed police-convened meetings with Muslim residents on July 5 and Hindu residents on July 12.

Importantly, CSSS expressly acknowledges the limitations of its investigation. The team did not have access to several relevant documents, including FIRs, CCTV footage, some permissions and correspondence, and municipal orders or circulars. The report therefore distinguishes between corroborated information, official statements, allegations and contested interpretations, and expressly states that determining individual criminal responsibility falls outside its scope.

A detailed may be viewed here.

The goat enclosure dispute

According to Muslim residents interviewed by CSSS, goats had been temporarily kept in the society ahead of Bakri Eid for approximately eight to ten years. They consistently stated that ritual slaughter, or qurbani, had never taken place within the residential complex and was not intended there in 2026. At the same time, the report does not dismiss the concerns of Hindu residents.

Hemendra Joshi, who identified himself as a complainant, said he had objected to the practice since 2019, citing smell and use of common space. The report therefore characterises the dispute as one involving both a longstanding practice and longstanding objections. A police application or intimation was reportedly made around May 13–15. Senior Police Inspector Rajendra Kamble subsequently confirmed that police permission had been granted in time. Preparation of the temporary enclosure reportedly began around May 16. However, the administrative process remained unclear. Residents said they had approached MBMC and received acknowledgement of their application but neither a clear approval nor rejection.

Around May 24, municipal officials removed the asbestos roof of the temporary enclosure, reportedly citing fire-safety concerns. Bamboo supports were subsequently removed, and authorities ultimately ordered the goats to be taken away. Approximately 48 goats were moved on May 26 to a ground near NH School in Naya Nagar. The police later raised questions about documentation, including medical certificates, ear tags and photographs, as well as animal transportation requirements. But residents maintained that they had followed substantially the same practice for years and were willing to comply with applicable rules. The report notes that Senior PI Kamble himself recommended, after the incident, that MBMC formulate clearer regulations governing the transportation and management of animals.

When an administrative dispute became a communal confrontation

The report’s central finding on the Poonam Cluster episode is that there were real practical grievances, but these were subsequently transformed into a communal confrontation. Residents had longstanding disagreements concerning smell, hygiene, visitors and common space. The tensions also reflected earlier disputes over Taraweeh prayers, namaz, loudspeakers, religious lighting and banners, festival committees and the use of common areas.

The decisive change came when people and organisations from outside the society became involved. Residents reported the arrival of persons associated with the VHP and Bajrang Dal. Nagnath Kamble told the fact-finding team that Poonam Cluster residents had approached the VHP for assistance and estimated that the crowd eventually reached 400–500 people. Violence followed. A person interviewed by CSSS, identified as Rahim, said he was assaulted by a group after stopping near the society to enquire about the gathering. Police personnel reportedly extracted him from the crowd.

Three FIRs had been registered, according to Senior PI Kamble, although the fact-finding team did not have sufficient documentary material to establish individual criminal responsibility. A particularly provocative moment involved the appearance of a pig during the confrontation. Videos circulated widely, but CSSS could not conclusively establish who was responsible or what the person’s intention was. That uncertainty is important.

The report does not convert an unverified viral narrative into a factual conclusion. Instead, it observes that social-media circulation and political intervention increasingly reframed the dispute as one about animal sacrifice. This was materially different from the consistent account given to CSSS by Muslim residents: that the goats were being temporarily housed and that qurbani was neither being conducted nor proposed within Poonam Cluster.

What does the law actually regulate?

One of the report’s most important contributions is its attempt to separate legal questions that were repeatedly collapsed into one another. There are different legal issues concerning transportation of goats; temporary keeping of goats, animal welfare, slaughter, municipal regulation, fire safety, sanitation, and use of common residential spaces.

The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, particularly Sections 3 and 11, establishes duties concerning animal welfare and prevention of unnecessary suffering. The Transport of Animals Rules, 1978, as amended, regulate transportation of sheep and goats, including veterinary certification, fitness for transport, overcrowding and transport conditions. But, crucially, the report says these provisions do not by themselves establish a blanket prohibition on temporarily keeping goats inside residential society premises.

The report also examines the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949, and the Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act, 1976. It notes that goats are not among the cattle categories whose slaughter is prohibited under the Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act, although slaughter remains subject to other applicable requirements. The report also considers the Bombay High Court’s 2019 interim order in Jiv Maitri Trust v. Union of India, but points out that the case concerned temporary permissions for slaughter during Bakri Eid and did not, on its face, establish a general prohibition on temporarily keeping goats in residential societies. The critical administrative problem, therefore, was not that no regulation could apply It was that the applicable regulation was never made sufficiently clear.

CSSS says it was unable to establish which specific MBMC provision, bye-law or administrative order was being used to prohibit or regulate the temporary keeping of goats at Poonam Cluster. If requirements had changed, or if existing requirements were being enforced differently in 2026, residents should have been informed beforehand and the rules applied transparently and consistently.

The report is particularly critical of the involvement of outside organisations. Its finding is not that religious organisations cannot raise concerns. Rather, it argues that whatever the merits of residents’ grievances, outside organisations cannot be permitted to exercise an extra-legal veto over the religious practices of residents or substitute themselves for lawful authorities and internal dispute-resolution mechanisms. This is a larger constitutional and civic question.

The report’s recommendations

CSSS calls for a considerably more transparent administrative system. It recommends that MBMC and police publish clear, multilingual guidelines well before major festivals, distinguishing between animal transportation, temporary housing, slaughter, sound, common spaces, sanitation, fire safety and crowd management. It proposes a single-window permission mechanism or nodal officer coordinating municipal, police, fire, veterinary and transport authorities. It calls for impartial and proportionate enforcement, written reasons for approvals and refusals, and an end to selective enforcement.

The report also recommends representative internal mechanisms within Poonam Cluster involving different faith communities, owners and tenants, women and senior citizens. It also calls for trained mediators and Mohalla or Shanti Committees to intervene before ordinary disputes become communal flashpoints.

Most significantly, the report calls on police to act preventively against unauthorised gatherings, intimidation, threats, blockades and attempts by outside groups to impose decisions upon residential communities.

On hate speech, it refers to Sections 196 and 299 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the Supreme Court’s directions in Shaheen Abdullah v. Union of India concerning suo motu action by police where hate speech meets the legal threshold. The report also calls for more responsible communication by political actors, community organisations and the media, specifically warning against conflating temporary goat-keeping with slaughter.

The report ultimately does not call for the State to ignore genuine grievances. Its position is more demanding: the State must address genuine grievances without allowing communal identity to determine whose grievance is heard, whose violence is prosecuted and whose rights are protected. CSSS concludes that the Poonam Cluster episode was neither simply a dispute about goats nor an inexplicable outbreak of communal hostility. It resulted from the interaction of religious practice, local grievances, unclear regulation, weak internal dispute-resolution mechanisms, municipal intervention, outside mobilisation, political intervention, violence and social-media amplification.

The complete report may be read here:

Related:

Attempts to communalise Mira Road Eid preparations defused by residents and police

Mira Road: Mosque clerics welcome people from across religion and caste to Jama Masjid Al Shams this Ramzan

Mira Road to see Hindutva rally tomorrow after HC grants permission, citizens approach police to ensure peace

Bombay HC grants conditional permission to BJP MLA Raja Singh for Feb 25 Mira Road-Bhayander meet, orders videotaping and ‘No Hate Speech’

#GetWellSoonGeetaJain Campaign gets off the ground, Mira Road Bhayander residents’ push back against Hate

Mira-Road Bhayander Police rejects permission to BJP MLA T Raja Singh for rally on February 25, cites hate speeches

Police disrupt anti hate-speech campaign in Mira-Bhayandar 

The post From the violence of 2024 to the Bakri Eid tensions of 2026, a fact-finding report examines Mira Road’s deepening communal fault lines appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In the letter, Rahul Gandhi said that tribal students across the state had been protesting for more than ten days. “Many Adivasi students come from remote villages and depend on government hostels to study in the cities. A new rule bars anyone over 30 from these hostels, excluding many who are still completing their studies or preparing for exams,” he stated. He added that hostels for these students are unsafe as they reportedly lack food, sanitation and medical care. Incidents of snakebites have also been reported. “I was shocked to learn that female students returning after an extended absence must undergo pregnancy tests and a range of other medical tests, to prove their ‘fitness’. It is a humiliation that presumes them guilty until they prove otherwise. This rule is an attack on their dignity and their humanity,” he said.

Adivasi students across Maharashtra started their protest after the BJP-led state government introduced a government resolution (GR) on Aug 4, which fixed the age limit for staying in hostels at 26. However, after the decision sparked protests, the GR was revised on August 14 and the age limit was increased to 30. The students, however, are demanding complete withdrawal of the GR, besides seeking better facilities at hostels run by the Tribal Development Department across the state. They are also demanding immediate recruitment of aspirants from tribal community for 12,500 vacant posts which they claim have been stuck for a long time.

In his letter to Mr. Fadnavis, Mr. Gandhi followed up on interactions with students in Pune during the Chhatron ki Gunj (echoes of students) programme last Saturday. He said students from across Maharashtra had told him about hostel rules that “strip them of their dignity and shut off their path to education”.

Mr. Gandhi expressed particular concern over facilities for women, saying female students returning after an extended absence were required to undergo pregnancy tests and other medical examinations to establish their “fitness”. “It is a humiliation that presumes them guilty until they prove otherwise,” he said, describing the requirement as an “attack on their dignity and their humanity”. Mr. Gandhi also flagged a rule barring those above 30 from hostel accommodation, saying it excluded many students still completing their studies or preparing for examinations.

He also alleged that hostels were unsafe and often lacked food, sanitation and medical care, with students suffering injuries and deaths, including from snake bites.

“These students are not asking for charity. They are demanding what is theirs by right,” Mr. Gandhi said, urging Mr. Fadnavis to hear the students’ concerns and resolve them immediately.

Earlier in the day, the party had sought a special committee to probe the deaths of tribal children allegedly due to malnutrition in Madhya Pradesh and of tribal girls following snakebite in Maharashtra and demanded action against officials found responsible.

Adivasi Congress chief Vikrant Bhuria also called for a safety audit of tribal hostels, citing alleged lapses in facilities in the two States. Addressing a press conference here, Mr. Bhuria claimed that 22 children from the Baiga tribal community had died of malnutrition and related diseases in the Balaghat district of Madhya Pradesh. He alleged that a nutritional meal delivered to households had been discontinued for six months and that the nearest primary health centre was 20 km away. Vaccination coverage in the area was also below 80%, he claimed. “I had asked in the Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly how much budget was allocated for preventing malnutrition in the State’s tribal blocks and projects from 2020 to 2025, and how much of it was spent. The response was extremely concerning. The government said malnourished children are given a nutritional meal worth only ₹12 per day,” he said.

On Maharashtra, Bhuria alleged that more than 70 girls at a tribal hostel in Gadchiroli were made to sleep on the floor in a single room. Six girls were hospitalised following a snakebite incident, of whom three died, he claimed.

Mr. Bhuria said students protesting in Nashik were continuing their hunger strike, demanding better facilities at tribal hostels. He sought a probe into the Balaghat deaths and action against officials found responsible.

Related:

Bihar: Not just Delhi, Patna, Siwan too saw brute police violence against demonstrating students: PUCL

Maharashtra: After backlash, govt. moves to withdraw FIRs against student protesters but questions remain

Youth Uprising: A protest, a brute crackdown, a continuing countrywide response

Mumbai stands with students, but the state pushes back

The post Forced pregnancy tests for Adivasi women students in Maharashtra’s hostels, Rahul Gandhi registers strong protest appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The revised schedule was issued by the Election Commission in an order dated August 19, following a request from the Chief Electoral Officer of Maharashtra.

Under the revised programme, the draft electoral roll will be published on August 31. Voters will then have one month, up to September 30, to submit claims and objections.

The final electoral roll, which was earlier scheduled to be published on October 7, will now be released on November 4.

Claims and objections period extended

The revised schedule provides for the filing of claims and objections from August 31 to September 30. The notice and disposal of claims and objections will continue until October 29.

Under the earlier schedule, the draft roll was to be published on August 5, with claims and objections accepted until September 4. The notice and disposal process was scheduled to continue from August 5 to October 3. The changes therefore extend the overall timeline for scrutiny of the draft electoral roll and disposal of claims and objections before the final list is prepared.

Polling station rationalisation by August 24

The Election Commission has also revised the timeline for rationalisation and rearrangement of polling stations. The exercise, which was earlier scheduled to be completed by July 29, is now to be completed by August 24.

The revised programme also directs election officials to communicate the changes to all concerned officers and to publicise the revised schedule through available means. Political parties are also required to be informed about the changes in writing.

Enumeration process concluded on August 17

The house-to-house enumeration exercise in Maharashtra has already concluded. Booth Level Officers (BLOs) visited electors and collected filled and signed Enumeration Forms as part of the SIR process.

According to information released by the Chief Electoral Officer, Maharashtra has around 9.78 crore electors. Of these, 7.71 crore electors, or 78.85 per cent, submitted their filled and signed Enumeration Forms during the house-to-house exercise conducted between June 30 and August 17. The remaining 2.07 crore electors have been categorised as “Uncollectable EF” under the prescribed norms and based on the factual status recorded during the exercise.

Original schedule began in June

The original SIR programme provided for preparation, training and printing between June 20 and June 29. This was followed by house-to-house visits by BLOs from June 30 to July 29. The house-to-house enumeration period was subsequently extended, and the collection of Enumeration Forms ultimately concluded on August 17.

The Election Commission has now revised the subsequent stages of the exercise, including publication of the draft roll, the claims and objections period, disposal of objections and publication of the final electoral roll.

October 1 qualifying date

The SIR in Maharashtra is being conducted with October 1, 2026, as the qualifying date.

The revised schedule will govern the remaining stages of the electoral roll revision, beginning with publication of the draft roll on August 31. Claims and objections will then be considered before the final electoral roll is published on November 4.

Related:

Maharashtra SIR: 2.08 crore (20.8 million) voter forms “uncollected” hence may not be listed in August 24 draft electoral roll

SIR 2025-26: Dismantling the very Idea of India?

21 Opposition parties to CJI: SIR process is irregular and illegal, must be suspended

SIR and the Making of a Stateless Citizen? | R. Rajagopal Speaks Out | Teesta Setalvad

Karnataka launches SIR with 5.5 crore voters, State Govt voices transparency concerns

The post ECI revises Maharashtra SIR schedule, final voter list to be published on November 4 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

To date, the issue of police brutality that has received national attention is the barbarity displayed in the capital of Delhi on July 20. Reports on this aspect of overt police misconduct may be read here, here and here. However, the conduct of the state police in another BJP-ruled state like Bihar has received scant attention.

Following newspaper reports of this brutality in Patna and Siwan, the PUCL’s Bihar Unit constituted a fact-finding team to investigate the cases of police firing and bullet injuries sustained by students, custodial torture of students resulting in severe hearing loss sustained by a student, and intimidation acts of the police. The team visited Siwan on the August 15 and 16 and met all the injured victims of either police firing or custodial torture. It also came across cases of intimidation by police, house raids, and damage to property and beating, profiling of victims on the lines of caste and religion, and attempts to destroy evidence. This report is also being prepared. Similarly, PUCL acted on a complaint regarding police brutality unleashed on the students of a welfare hostel in Sitamarhi, where a day before the July 22 protests, the police entered the hostel and brutally beat students. This incident is currently under investigation.

Thereafter, on August 22, at the IMA Hall, Gandhi Maidan. Patna, a public hearing was conducted to record testimonies and first person accounts of the statewide police brutality between July 21-25 in several locations of the state. The report was released today. This was a part of the human rights platform’s decision post July 25 to comprehensively document cases of police brutality, violating the human rights of Indian citizens guaranteed by the law, PUCL decided to hold a public hearing so that the voices of the victims could be captured and incorporated in its report.

As mentioned above, the public hearing was organised on 22 August 2026 at the Indian Medical Association (IMA) Hall, South-East Gandhi Maidan, Patna. Over one hundred people participated, comprising mostly students, PUCL members, and civil society activists. Most students belonged to organisations such as AISA, AISF, Disha Chhatra Sangathan, and NSUI. One student activist, and a victim of police violence as well, belonged to Chhatra RJD. A panel, comprising Basant Chaudhary (senior advocate, Patna High Court), Sudha Varghese (Padma Shri awardee, social worker), Arshad Ajman (social activist), and Pranav Chaudhary (former Assistant Editor of the Times of India, Patna edition), presided over the proceedings. A total of 19 victims of police brutality presented their testimonies. Of these 19 victims of police violence, a recorded video testimony of Bullet Kumar Gond, an ST youth from Siwan district, was presented as his bullet injuries and subsequent intramedullary nailing did not permit travel.

Based on the testimonies during the public hearing, also supported by the fact-findings in Siwan and Patna, the following types of cases of police brutality, seriously infringing upon human rights of the protesters, were recorded:

1. Brutal lathi charge deliberately targeting students to injure them. In some cases, beating of students happened outside the sites of protests or at the timings of the bandh call.
2. Hitting girl protesters on their private parts.
3. Firing directly on students, without any warning or immediate provocations, resulting in several cases of bullet injuries. In some instances, those injured by bullets were further beaten up.
4. Using a firearm as lethal as the AK-47 on students, though this firearm is not supposed to be used on protesting citizens.
5. Custodial torture of students by the police, resulting in injuries, loss of hearing, etc.
6. Illegal detention of students without presenting them before a magistrate within 24 hours.
7. Detained students’ families not informed of their whereabouts, thus denying the students the support of their families and lawyers.
8. Students sent to judicial custody without informing them of the charges against them or providing them with a copy of the FIR.
9. Students sent to judicial custody without access to a lawyer to defend them before the magistrate.
10. Destruction of evidence by police, such as seizing students’ and passerby citizens’ mobile phones to destroy video recordings related to the use of force by them.
11. Raiding students’ and activists’ homes in the dead of night without any search warrant. Beating of residents, damaging household items, abusing women, including older women, and infringing the right to privacy by checking mobile and personal belongings.
12. Making misogynist remarks against girls during home raids and in custody. For example, family members being warned that the girl will not find a groom if she participates in protests along with boys.
13. Obstructing an officer of the court (advocate on record of the Patna High Court) in discharging his duty to represent his client, filing FIRs against two lawyers in unsubstantiated charges of liquor consumption and another charge of obstructing the police officer in discharging their duty, parading them handcuffed in public, and leaking their arrest memo photos to the media.
14. Custodialisation and beating of citizens who were passersby at that moment. One such passerby was hit by a bullet fired by police in Siwan.
15. Even minors kept in police custody, not presented before the Child Welfare Committee and the JJ Board.
16. Calling students terrorists. Threatening protesters during their custody of imposing UAPA and making them suffer like Umar Khalid.
17. Profiling of arrested protesters on religious and caste lines, and differential treatment with them based on these lines. In particular, Muslims, SCs, women, and CPI (ML) activists were harshly treated.

The panellists were unanimous in their opinion that the testimonies made the entire state culpable and, rather than calling it merely police brutality, it should be called state brutality or state repression. It is only when the government decides to crush a movement that the police unleash their brutality ruthlessly.

Hence, the PUCL seeks accountability of the state for human rights violations.

Demands of the PUCL, Bihar

Towards the end of the public hearing, PUCL Bihar Unit presented a charter of demands and also announced its future action plan. The key demands are as follows:

• An independent and impartial investigation into the police actions starting from 21 July to July 27, 2026, including but not limited to the use of firearms in Siwan and Jehanabad, brutal lathi charge against protesters throughtout the state, illegal detention, custodial torture, violations of legal provisions while remanding the detained protestors to judicial custody, harassment of activists even after the protests were over, and mistreatment of two lawyer members of PUCL and imposition of false cases against them. The inquiry should also include brutal police action inside the welfare hostel in Sitamarhi on the evening of July 21.
• Fixing accountability for police brutality and stern punitive action against police officials at various levels who violated the rights of protesters and other victims.
• Fast-tracking the process to withdraw all 64 FIRs against protesting students. Identification and withdrawal of cases filed even after 6 pm on 26 July if they are related to the protests and Bihar bandh, and also related to the protests filed by private individuals against the protesters.
• Adequate compensation for all persons injured in the Siwan firing, commensurate with the nature and seriousness of their injuries.
• Protection of the constitutional right to peaceful protest, so that students, activists and ordinary citizens are not subjected to violence merely for raising their voices.
• Review of the police manual and police training and suitable changes therein so that police are sensitive about civil rights and regulating the protesting crowd, and do not resort to brutal methods.

Background: It was on July 25, several PUCL members raised their worries after watching and reading the news about Bihar police’s brutal action against protesting students in Patna and other parts of the state. Hundreds of student protesters and others were detained in several police stations, and some were even sent to judicial custody. There was also news of injuries sustained by several protesters due to lathi charge, police firing, and tear gas shelling. Police picked some students and youth activists from their homes. Some non-participating youth who just happened to pass by the site of protests were picked up by the police and detained or sent to jail. We also received news of the beating of some students in police custody.

It is in these circumstances that the PUCL Bihar Unit decided to play an active role in providing immediate legal support to detained or jailed protesters and other youth and, for this purpose, collaborated with the Jan Nyay Abhiyan in Patna and other districts. A group of lawyers worked day and night to identify detained or jailed protesters, file their bail petitions, meet those in police custody to assess their physical condition and needs, and accompany them when police presented them before a judicial magistrate. While performing this important role of a human rights defender and also as officers of the court, two of the PUCL lawyer members were kept in illegal confinement and implicated in false cases. Currently, they are on bail.

Action Plan

All testimonies and remarks by the panellists, as well as fact-finding reports, will form an important part of a detailed report on state repression unleashed on protesting students. PUCL sees this report as a useful tool for seeking justice for the victims. The report will be submitted to relevant government offices, commissions, legislative committees, courts, police and judicial training institutions, academic institutions, and other civil rights organisations. The full report will be printed and disseminated, and its summary will be sent for publication to newspapers, news portals, magazines and journals.

On the legal front, PUCL plans to hold a meeting with prominent lawyers to explore the possibility of filing a writ in the High Court and/or other actions, as per their advice. Together with Jan Nyay Abhiyan, PUCL will also monitor the withdrawal of 64 FIRs related to student protests, as per the government’s announcement. Moreover, there are still cases filed by private individuals or the police but not listed in the 64 FIRs.

An invitation was received during the public hearing to conduct a similar public hearing in Jehanabad on the use of firearms and other brutal methods employed by the police against protesters. The PUCL has stated that it will pursue the invitation and also explore the possibility of organising public hearings in Siwan and Sitamarhi.

Related:

Maharashtra: After backlash, govt. moves to withdraw FIRs against student protesters but questions remain

Youth Uprising: A protest, a brute crackdown, a continuing countrywide response

Mumbai stands with students, but the state pushes back

The exam crisis that became a battle for accountability

Brute Police Action: Mumbai’s crackdown on protestors in solidarity with CJP & Student Groups, AISF, SFI & AISA

The post Bihar: Not just Delhi, Patna, Siwan too saw brute police violence against demonstrating students: PUCL appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Ram Puniyani as he is known, has crisscrossed the country holding training workshops on communal harmony, the historical growth of Hindu communalism etc. He is currently the chairperson of the Centre for Study of Society and Secularism (CSSS) founded by the late, Dr Asghar Ali Engineer.

The far Hindu right’s tortured bid to appropriate Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar, the architect of India’s constitution evolved into a book by Puniyani, first exclusively featured on Sabrangindia on the eve of Constitution Day (November 26, 2016) on November 18 that year. The book, Ambedkar, Hindutva and RSS has been widely used by activists especially in Maharashtra. The excerpt may be read here. Another article by him exposing the hypocrisy and authoritarianism behind the Hindu right’s obsessive vegetarianism may be read here. In this article, apart from other historically significant details, Puniyani points out that Hitler who unleashed the biggest ever pogroms in history of modern times was a vegetarian! Significantly, Puniyani drew the connection in the anti-Buddhist (pro Brahmanism) stance of the supremacist Hindu right in their attempts to denigrate Emperor Asoka in this article that may be read here.

In March 2019, Dr Ram Puniyani was the subject of threats to his life from right wing goons; this too was exclusively covered by us at Sabrangindia and may be referred to here. Ram Puniyani had then written to the then Mumbai Police Commissioner about receiving threats and even met the Mumbai Jt CP with a delegation of other citizens. Reports may be read here and here. He was then granted round the clock protection.

A brief bibliography of his pamphlets and books, as medical professional and secular activist doyen (sourced from Wikipedia) is impressive:

• Clinical Hemorheology: New Horizons(New Age International, 1996), Applied Clinical Hemorheology (with Hideyuki Nimi, Quest Publications, 1998)
• The Other Cheek: Minorities under Threat(Media House, 2000), Second Assassination of Gandhi (University of Leicester, 2002),
• Communalism: What is False: What is True(with Khalid Azam, Bombay Sarvoda Friendship Center, 2002)
• Communal Politics: Facts Versus Myths(2003)
• Communalism: Illustrated Primer(Safdar Hashmi Memorial Trust and J&P Publications, 2004)
• Hindu Extreme Right-Wing Groups : Ideology and Consequences(Media House, 2004)
• Fascism of Sangh Parivar(Media House, 2004)
• Religion, Power and Violence: Expression Of Politics In Contemporary Times, (SAGE, 2005)
• Contours of Hindu Rashtra: Hindutva, Sangh Parivar And Contemporary Politics(Kalpaz, 2006)
• Indian Democracy, Pluralism and Minorities(Global Media, 2006)
• The Politics behind Anti-Christian Violence(compilation of investigation committee reports, Media House, 2006) Terrorism: Facts versus Myths (Pharos Media, 2007)

Several secular national parties have conducted workshops conducted by Dr Ram Puniyani. As stated by the CSSS today on the occasion of Dr Puniyani turning 81:

“Dr. Ram Puniyani’s strength was that developing a deep understanding about the root causes of communal conflict and violence, he could explain it even to the grassroot activists in a language and manner they could easily understand. His central point would be that what appears superficially as violence between the followers of two religions has deeper roots and causes. Communal identities and conflicts appeared in India during colonial period and as a result of colonial exploitation of India and their divide and rule policy. India was transitioning from feudalism to introduction of capitalist mode of production controlled by the colonial power. Religion based communal identities emerged as a result, and were encouraged by the British rulers. The communal elite supported the British rulers and sought their patronage for a greater share vis-à-vis the rival community. This struggle for greater share within the colonial governance framework resulted in deepening communal identities and in violent conflicts. To simplify this complex process, while addressing workshops, Dr. Ram Puniyani would enact with his word power the feudal rulers and their culture, the transition to colonial rule by his typical “rail, mail and jail” allegory. He argued that the feudal classes, which were being increasingly weakened due to introduction of capitalist mode of production by the colonial rulers resorted to communal identity politics. He used humour and constantly engaged the participants of the workshop in a conversational mode. The participants would return with an enriched understanding of the root causes of communalism and communal nationalism. He would end his two-day presentation with the shared and composite culture of India and shared secular nationalism. The rise of Sangh Parivar’s fascist ideology was just not against the minorities, but also against all the socially and economically marginalised communities, viz. the Dalits, women, the working class, and the farmers.”

Dr Puniyani is the recipient pf several prestigious awards – Indira Gandhi Award for national integration, the Communal Harmony Award, which is awarded by National Communal Harmony Foundation under the Ministry of Home Affairs, Mukundan Menon Award for Journalism, just to name a few.

SabrangIndia and Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) take the opportunity of his 81^st birthday to wish only more such dedicated proselytising from the gentle Dr Ram Puniyani.

–Editors

Related:

Nationalism | Religion | Hate | Violence | History : Ram Puniyani with Teesta Setalvad

The post Ram Puniyani at 81: A teacher of secularism, an everyday passion appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It would be a sad day for the city of New York that an organisation, which is vehemently opposed to democracy, humanism, egalitarianism, multi-culturalism, equality within Hinduism, and world peace, is allowed unquestioned narration. The RSS remains a ‘threat’ to world peace and this is vouched for not just by its critics but also by its own official records.

Of multiple documents, only the author in three parts is sharing a few crucial facts from the RSS’ own archives and records of activities.

1. ANTI-HUMANITY
2. ANTI-HINDU
3. ANTI DEMOCRATIC-SECULAR INDIA

ANTI-HUMANITY

RSS’ design of Hindus ruling the world

This supremacist organization has been working overtime to establish hegemony of ‘Hindus’ over the world. Its two most important theorists, VD Savarkar (1883-1966) and MS Golwalkar (1906-1973) whom RSS follows religiously chalked out this design in the first half of 20^th century itself.  Savarkar ended his bigoted work ‘Hindutva’ (1923) with the following warning:

“22 crores of people [population of India at that time], with India for their basis of operation, for their Fatherland and for their Holyland with such a history behind them, bound together by ties of common blood and common culture, can dictate their terms to the whole world. A day will come when mankind will have to face the force.”

[Savarkar, V.D., Hindutva, VK Kelkar, Poona, 1923, p. 128]

Golwalkar under whom hundreds of thousands of cadres have been groomed rephrased the same warning on behalf of Hindus to the world in his controversial book ‘We or Our Nation Hood Defined” (1939) in the following words:

“The Race Spirit has been awakening. The lion was not dead, only sleeping. He is rousing himself up again and the world has to see the might of the regenerated Hindu nation strike down the enemy’s hosts with its mighty arm. The star has risen and is steadily climbing up the firmament. At no distant date the world shall see it and tremble with fear or dance with delight…And Race Spirit calls, National consciousness blazes forth and we Hindus rally to the Hindu Standard, the Bhagwa Dhwaja [saffron flag], set our teeth in grim determination to wipe out the opposing forces.”

[Golwalkar, MS, We or Our Nationhood Defines, Bharat Publications, Nagpur, 1939, pp. 12-13][1]                                                                                                                             

Indian Diaspora divided on communal basis

Shockingly, Bhagwat shall be preaching ‘Universal Oneness’ despite causing dangerous fracture amongst the Indian diaspora which includes Hindus, Sikhs, Muslims, Jains, Buddhists, Parsis, Animists and those who do not believe in any religion. Its international wing is named as ‘Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh’ thus having no regard for people of Indian origin who are not Hindus. This anti-India attitude has given rise to deep religious divisions within the ranks of Indian diaspora in USA and other foreign countries where RSS is active. The RSS’ design to organise only Hindus abroad has already causing serious religion-based fissures leading to violence among the Indian diaspora in many cities of the world. This sectarian act of RSS, in fact, gives strong stimulus to followers of other religions of the diaspora to say good-bye to Indianness and organise themselves on religious basis.

RSS celebrated the Holocaust & planned to execute it for cleansing Indian Muslims & Christians

The most prominent ideologue of the RSS, MS Golwalkar (known as Guru Golwalkar in the RSS fraternity) who became RSS Supremo in 1940 has declared:

“If, as is indisputably proved, Hindusthan is the land of the Hindus and is the terra firma for the Hindu nation alone to flourish upon, what is to be the fate of all those, who, today, happen to live upon the land, though not belonging to the Hindu Race, Religion and culture.”

[Golwalkar, MS, We Or Our Nationhood Defined, Nagpur, 1939, p. 45.]

It would be like the Jews under Hitler and Mussolini. Thus, Golwalkar glorified the Holocaust in the following words:

“German Race pride has now become the topic of the day. To keep up the purity of the race and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic races—the Jews. Race pride at its highest has been manifested here. Germany has also shown how well-nigh impossible it is for races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by.”

[Ibid. –pp 34-35]

Golwalkar, finally, following the foot-steps of Hitler, arrived at the following solution for the minority “problem” in India; Muslims and Christians who were declared belonging to foreign races,

“From this stand point, sanctioned by the experience of shrewd old nations, the foreign races in Hindusthan [sic] must either adopt the Hindu culture and language, must learn to respect and hold in reverence Hindu religion, must entertain no idea but those of the glorification of the Hindu race and culture, i.e., of the Hindu nation and must lose their separate existence to merge in the Hindu race, or may stay in the country, wholly subordinated to the Hindu Nation, claiming nothing, deserving no privileges, far less any preferential treatment not even citizen’s rights. There is, at least should be, no other course for them to adopt. We are an old nation: let us deal, as old nations ought to and do deal, with the foreign races who have chosen to live in our country.”

[Ibid. pp. 47-48]

RSS rolls out racist project of producing ‘Aryan’ babies in India

According to RSS, Nazism is to be followed not only for cleansing of Muslims and Christians but also for producing the ‘Aryan’ babies as was done in Germany under Hitler. RSS has officially shared the information that one of its offshoots, Garbh Vigyan Sanskar (Uterus Science Culture), following the Vedic preaching and experiments in Germany, is conducting live trials in many parts of India for producing ‘fair’ and ‘tall’, ‘customized’ perfect babies. According to Dr. Hitesh Jani, convener of the Arogya Bharati (health wing), another outfit of RSS which is part of the project,

“Parents apparently have small, dark babies because they are impure, but purification is fortunately a simple, protocol-driven process tied to the lunar calendar. Prospective parents should copulate by astrological schedule and watch what they ingest, hear and think.”

[‘Ayurvedic eugenics: The RSS health wing promises designer babies like Germanic heroes. The fairness cream industry must be quaking.’ The Indian Express, Delhi, May 9, 2017; https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/editorials/ayurvedic-eugenics-rss-health-wing-ideal-babies-4646657/]

Neo-Nazi mass murderer of Norway, Breivik’s linkages with the RSS

Neo-Nazi mass murderer of Norway, Anders Behring Breivik, glorified Indian ‘Hindu Nationalists’. He opened a Pandora’s Box when declared “Hindu Nationalist” movement of India as a key ally in a global struggle to bring down democratic regimes across the world. Just before he went to massacre a large number of people in Norway on July 22, 2011, he released a “manifesto” of 1,518 pages, of which 102 pages dealt with the glorification of Hindutva movement of India. It declared support to “Sanatana Dharma movements and Indian nationalists in general.”

[‘Norwegian mass killer’s manifesto hails Hindutva: Goals of Indian Hindu nationalists were identical to Justiciar Knights, Anders Breivik claimed’, The Hindu, December 4, 2021. Link: http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/norwegian-mass-killers-manifesto-hails- hindutva/article2293829.ece]

1. ANTI-HINDU

RSS demands promulgation of the anti-Sudra and anti-Hindu women scripture Manusmriti discarding democratic-secular constitution of India

Those who believe that RSS wants cleansing of Muslims and Christians only know half of the reality. Its project of Hindu nation also demands a sub-human existence for Sudras (Dalits) and Hindu women. In fact, RSS wanted the Indian Constitution to be replaced by Manusmriti or Manu Code (laws of Manu) that is notorious for its derogatory and inhuman references to Sudras, Untouchables and women.

The Constituent Assembly of India finalised the Constitution of India on November 26, 1949, RSS was not happy. 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.”

By demanding promulgation of Manu Code in the Independent India RSS was simply following its mentor, philosopher and guide VD Savarkar who declared:

“Manusmriti is that scripture which is most worship-able after Vedas for our Hindu Nation and which from ancient times has become the basis of our culture-customs, thought and practice. This book for centuries has codified the spiritual and divine march of our nation. Even today the rules which are followed by crores of Hindus in their lives and practice are based on Manusmriti. Today Manusmriti is Hindu Law.”

[Savarkar, V.D., ‘Women in Manusmriti’ in Savarkar Samagar (collection of Savarkar’s writings in Hindi) volume IV, Prabhat, Delhi, 2000, p. 416.]

For RSS, Casteism is synonymous with Hindu nation

Faith of RSS brass in Manusmriti, naturally, leads them to believe in Casteism too which gave birth to the debased practice of Untouchability. For RSS Casteism is the essence of Hindu Nationalism. Golwalkar did not mince words in declaring that Casteism was synonymous with the Hindu Nation. According to him, the Hindu people are none else but,

“The Hindu People, they said, is the Virat Purusha, the Almighty manifesting Himself. Though they did not use the word ‘Hindu’, it is clear from the following description of the Almighty in Purusha-Sukta [in the 10th book of Rig Ved] wherein it is stated that the sun & the moon are His eyes, the stars and the skies are created from his nabhi [navel] and Brahmin is the head, Kshatriya the hands, Vaishya the thighs and Shudra the feet. [Italics as in the original text] This means that the people who have this fourfold arrangement, i.e., the Hindu People, is [sic] our God. This supreme vision of Godhead is the very core of our concept of ‘nation’ and has permeated our thinking and given rise to various unique concepts of our cultural heritage.”

[Golwalkar, M. S., Bunch of Thoughts, p.36-37.]

The kind of ‘Hindutva’ civilization do the RSS and their camp want to build by enforcing the laws of Manu, can be gleaned by simply glimpsing at some of the ‘laws prescribed by Manu’ for the ‘lower castes, Untouchables and women.’

Some of these dehumanizing and degenerated laws, which are presented here, are self-explanatory.

A selection of Laws of Manu denigrating Dalits/Untouchables

1. For the sake of the prosperity of the worlds (the divine one) caused the Brahmana, the Kshatriya, the Vaisya, and the Sudra to proceed from his mouth, his arm, his thighs and his feet. (I/31)
2. One occupation only the lord prescribed to the Sudras, to serve meekly even these (other) three castes. (I/91)
3. Once-born man (a Sudra), who insults a twice-born man with gross invective, shall have his tongue cut out; for he is of low origin. (VIII/270)
4. If he mentions the names and castes (jati) of the (twice-born) with contumely, an iron nail, ten fingers long, shall be thrust red-hot into his mouth. (VIII/271)
5. If he arrogantly teaches Brahmanas their duty, the king shall cause hot oil to be poured into his mouth and into his ears. (VIII/272)
6. He who raises his hand or a stick, shall have his hand cut off; he who in anger kicks with his foot, shall have his foot cut off. (VIII/280)
7. A low-caste man who tries to place himself on the same seat with a man of a high caste, shall be branded on his hip and be banished, or (the king) shall cause his buttock to be gashed. (VIII/281)

As per the Manu Code if Sudras are to be given most stringent punishments for even petty violations/actions, the same Code of Manu is very lenient towards Brahmins.

Shloka 380 in Chapter VIII bestowing profound love on Brahmins decrees:

“Let him never slay a Brahmana, though he have committed all (possible) crimes; let him banish such an (offender), leaving all his property (to him) and (his body) unhurt.”

A selection of Laws of Manu demeaning Hindu women

1. Day and night woman must be kept in dependence by the males (of) their (families), and, if they attach themselves to sensual enjoyments, they must be kept under one’s control. (IX/2)
2. Her father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects (her) in youth, and her sons protect (her) in old age; a woman is never fit for independence. (IX/3)
3. Women do not care for beauty, nor is their attention fixed on age; (thinking), ‘(It is enough that) he is a man,’ they give themselves to the handsome and to the ugly. (IX/14)
4. Through their passion for men, through their mutable temper, through their natural heartlessness, they become disloyal towards their husbands, however carefully they may be guarded in this (world). (IX/15)
5. (When creating them) Manu allotted to women (a love of their) bed, (of their) seat and (of) ornament, impure desires, wrath, dishonesty, malice, and bad conduct. (IX/17)[2]

[The above selection of Manu’s Codes is from F. Max Muller, Laws of Manu, LP Publications, Delhi, 1996; first published in 1886. The bracket after each code incorporates number of chapter/number of code according to the above edition.]

The reproduced parts of the Manu Code above need no further elaboration and commentary. They are too glaringly iniquitous, filled with venom, supremacist and written to perpetuate degeneration against Untouchables who are referred to as Sudras by Manu. Perhaps this was the reason that the German philosopher, Friedrich Nietzsche who contributed immensely to the growth of totalitarian ideas in Europe in the 20th century, was enamoured of this this work.

Significantly, a copy of Manusmriti was burnt as a protest in the presence of Dr. BR Ambedkar during the historic Mahad agitation on December 25, 1927. Dr Ambedkar called upon Dalits to commemorate December 25 as the Manusmriti Dehen Diwas (Manusmriti burning day) in future. In fact, according to Ambedkar, it is Brahmanism, the basis of the RSS world-view that is the original brand of fascism in the history of human civilization.

[https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/andhra-pradesh/manusmriti-dahan-divas-protest-staged-at-collectorate/article30396588.ece]

Golwalkar’s dehumanised take on improving the breed of Kerala Hindus

RSS which claims to be the ‘largest world organisation of Hindus’ is, in fact, working over-time to establish the hegemony of the North Indian Brahmanical order over Hindu society in South India. The RSS brand of Brahmanism treats South Indian Hindus as inferior racially. In its world-view North Indian Brahmins are the superior lot in comparison to the rest.

And RSS does this brazenly. Golwalkar was invited to address the students of the School of Social Science of Gujarat University on December 17, 1960. In this address, while underlying his firm belief in the Race Theory, he touched upon the issue of cross-breeding of human beings in the Indian society in history. He said:

“In an effort to better the human species through cross-breeding the Namboodri Brahamanas of the North were settled in Kerala and a rule was laid down that the eldest son of a Namboodri family could marry only the daughter of Vaishya, Kashtriya or Shudra communities of Kerala. Another still more courageous rule was that the first off-spring of a married woman of any class must be fathered by a Namboodri Brahman and then she could beget children by her husband. Today this experiment will be called adultery but it was not so, as it was limited to the first child.”

[M. S. Golwalkar cited in Organiser, January 2, 1961.]

Inside the RSS: Males are Volunteers and Women are Servants

The RSS, founded in 1925, was conceived as an exclusive male organisation whose cadres were to be known as swayamsevak or volunteers. The RSS top brass made its intentions clear of treating women as of lower status than males when it decided to start its women wing; Rashtr Sevika Samiti in 1936. Its nomenclature made it clear that women members were not called as swayamsevak or volunteers but Rashtr Sevika (maids servile to the nation) or female servants of the nation; the Hindu nation. This identity of women in the Rashtr Sevika Samiti as servants was not only a technical issue but the outcome of the RSS’ attitude towards Hindu women which glorifies the subservient role of women in society.  These are Rashtr Sevika Samiti members [who according to its website number around three lakh] only who pledge to maintain ‘faithfulness/virginity’, remain ‘modest’, ‘steadfast’, and not fall prey to ‘immorality and evil habits’. The RSS male swayamsevaks make no such commitment. [https://sevikasamiti.org/Prarthana]

Mohan Bhagwat, slated to be at Madison Square Garden on August 29, misses no opportunity to emphasise the subservient role of the Hindu women. While addressing leading RSS cadres at Indore, India, a stronghold of the RSS declared that Hindu women should restrict themselves to doing household chores as per the ‘social contract’.

According to him:

“Theory of contract, theory of social contract, a husband and wife are bound by a contract which says ‘you (woman) look after the household chores and satisfy me, I (man) will take care of your needs and will protect you’, and until she delivers her duties without fail, he keeps her on the contract and if she fails to honour the contract, he disowns her…”

[‘’Women meant to do household chores’: another shocker from RSS chief’, NDTV, Delhi, January 06, 2013. Link: https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/women-meant-to-do-household-chores-another-shocker-from-rss-chief-509519]

2. ANTI DEMOCRATIC-SECULAR INDIA

RSS does not stand for an inclusive India but an exclusive Hindu nation

The organization was formed in 1925 by Keshav Baliram Hedgewar (known as Doctorji in the RSS fraternity), Balakrishna Shivram Moonje, his mentor and Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, the theorist of the idea of Hindutva. Hedgewar was in the Indian National Congress (INC) but left it as he was against all religious communities joining anti-British freedom struggle led by MK Gandhi which treated people of all religions as part of the Indian nation and stood for an inclusive independent India. A biography of Hedgewar published by the RSS describes that he parted with INC because, “Gandhiji worked constantly with one eye on Hindu– Muslim unity…But Doctorji sensed danger in that move. In fact, he did not even relish the newfangled slogan of ‘Hindu– Muslim Unity’.

[Seshadri, H. V. (ed.), Dr. Hedgewar, the Epoch-Maker: A Biography, Sahitya Sindhu, Bangalore, 1981, p. 61.]

RSS’ antipathy to a democratic-secular India

The RSS, contrary to the principles of democracy, constantly demanded India to be ruled under a totalitarian regime. Golwalkar while delivering a speech before the 1350 top level cadres of the RSS in 1940 declared,

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

[MS Golwalkar, Shri Guruji Samagar Darshan (collected works of Golwalkar in Hindi), Bhartiya Vichar Sadhna, Nagpur, nd., Volume I, p. 11.]

RSS, a ‘cultural organisation’ worships arms

RSS claims to be a cultural organisation and the largest organisation of the Hindus of the world. But it is the only cultural-religious organization on this earth which worships armaments at a Hindu festival. The RSS was founded on Dussehra (Vijay Dashmi; festival celebrated as the day of victory of God Ram over Ravana). On this day the RSS holds its biggest programme of the year which is also celebration of its founding day. The most important part of the celebration is the ”shastr pooja” (worship of the arms) by the Supremo of the RSS.

[‘RSS Festivals: Discover the six key celebrations and their significance for the Sangh’, link: https://organiser.org/2024/08/18/251909/bharat/rss-festivals-discover-the-six-key-celebrations-and-their-significance-for-the-sangh/]

Highly decorated Indian Police officer on RSS terrorism under Modi rule

There are instances of honest senior officials who had the courage to bring in public domain record RSS’ terrorist activities. How RSS spread hatred and terrorised minorities of India in less than a year of Modi first term as the PM (2014-19) of India was described in detail by one of the most decorated cops of India, Julio Ribeiro, former ambassador to Romania and recipient of the Padma Bhushan, a prominent national award in the following words. Petrified as a Christian, he wrote on March 17, 2015:

“Today, in my 86th year, I feel threatened, not wanted, reduced to a stranger in my own country.  The same category of citizens who had put their trust in me to rescue them from a force they could not comprehend have now come out of the woodwork to condemn me for practising a religion that is different from theirs. I am not an Indian anymore, at least in the eyes of the proponents of the Hindu Rashtra.

“Is it coincidence or a well-thought-out plan that the systematic targeting of a small and peaceful community should begin only after the BJP government of Narendra Modi came to power last May? ‘Ghar wapsi’, the declaration of Christmas as ‘Good Governance Day’, the attack on Christian churches and schools in Delhi, all added to a sense of siege that now afflicts these peaceful people.

Christians have consistently punched above their weight — not as much as the tiny Parsi community, but just as noticeably. Education, in particular, has been their forte. Many schools, colleges, related establishments that teach skills for jobs have been set up and run by Christians. They are much in demand. Even diehard Hindus have sought admission in such centres of learning and benefited from the commitment and sincerity of Christian teachers. Incidentally, no one seems to have been converted to Christianity, though many, many have imbibed Christian values and turned ‘pseudo-secularist’.

“The Indian army was headed by a Christian general, the navy more than once, and same with the air force. The country’s defence forces have countless men and women in uniform who are Christians. How can they be declared non-Indians by Parivar hotheads out to create a pure Hindu Rashtra?

“It is tragic that these extremists have been emboldened beyond permissible limits by an atmosphere of hate and distrust. The Christian population, a mere 2 per cent of the total populace, has been subjected to a series of well-directed body blows. If these extremists later turn their attention to Muslims, which seems to be their goal, they will invite consequences that this writer dreads to imagine.”

[‘As a Christian, suddenly I am a stranger in my own country, writes Julio Ribeiro: And, as a Christian, suddenly a stranger in my own country.’ The Indian Express, Delhi, March 17, 2015]

What happened to the Gujarati Muslims when Golwalkar’s pupil, Narendra Modi ruled the state would be clear from the following words of an editorial in a prominent English daily of India, Hindustan Times,

“Daughters were gang-raped in front of their fathers and then had their heads bashed in. Their fathers were doused with petrol and set on fire. Their property was looted. Their businesses were destroyed. And the police stood by and did nothing.” [Hindustan Times, New Delhi, March 21, 2002.]

For RSS Indian Muslims and Christians are ‘internal threat’ number 1 and 2 respectively

In fact, the ‘Holy’ book for the RSS cadres Bunch of Thoughts, has a long chapter titled as ‘Internal Threats’ in which Muslim and Christian citizens of India are described as threat number one and two respectively. This chapter opens with the following statement:

“It has been the tragic lesson of the history of many a country in the world that the hostile elements within the country pose a far greater menace to national security then aggressors from outside.”

[Golwalkar, M.S., Bunch of Thoughts, Sahitya Sindhu, Bangalore, 1996, p. 177.]

While treating Muslims as ‘Internal Threat’ number 1, Golwalkar goes on to elaborate,

“Even to this day there are so many who say, ‘now there is no Muslim problem at all. All those riotous elements who supported Pakistan have gone away once for all. The remaining Muslims are devoted to our country. After all, they have no other place to go and they are bound to remain loyal’….It would be suicidal to delude ourselves into believing that they have turned patriots overnight after the creation of Pakistan. On the contrary, the Muslim menace has increased a hundredfold by the creation of Pakistan which has become a springboard for all their future aggressive designs on our country.”

[Ibid. pp. 177-78]

While deliberating on the ‘Internal Threat’ number 2, he says,

“Such is the role of Christian gentlemen residing in our land today, out to demolish not only the religious and social fabric of our life but also to establish political domination in various pockets and if possible all over the land.”

[Ibid. p. 193.]

Sikhism, Jainism, and Buddhism denied status of independent religions

RSS regards followers of Islam and Christianity as emigrant or foreigners and demands their cleansing as these two religions are declared to be foreign religions. However, RSS has no respect for Indian religions like Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism as these are not treated as independent religions but part of Hinduism. Guru Golwalkar set the agenda by declaring that, “the Buddhists, the Jain, the Sikh are all included in that one comprehensive word ‘Hindu’.”

[Golwalkar, MS, The Spotlights, Sahitya Sindhu, Bangalore, 1974, p. 171.]

Prominent RSS ideologue Nana Deshmukh who justified 1984 Massacre of Sikhs, conferred highest national award by the Modi government

RSS claims to have always stood for the Hindu-Sikh unity. It occasionally expresses its gratitude to Sikhism for saving Hinduism from Muslim aggression. However, it must be noted that RSS does not treat Sikhism as independent religion which discarded Casteism and Brahmanical hegemony but part of the Hinduism. So far as 1984 genocide of Sikhs in India is concerned RSS blamed Sikhs for their fate. Nana Deshmukh, a prominent whole timer and ideologue of the RSS [now deceased] circulated a document titled ‘Moments of soul searching’ on November 8, 1984, justifying this horrendous genocide. Nana Deshmukh in this document presented the justification of the Sikh genocide by arguing:

1. The massacre of Sikhs was not the handiwork of any group or anti-social elements but the result of a genuine feeling of anger among Hindus.
2. Deshmukh did not distinguish the action of the two security personnel of Indira Gandhi, who happened to be Sikhs, from that of the whole Sikh community. According to his document the killers of Indira Gandhi were working under some kind of mandate of their community.
3. Sikhs themselves invited these attacks.
4. He glorified Operation Blue Star and described any opposition to it as anti-national. When Sikhs were being killed in thousands he was warning the country of Sikh extremism, thus offering ideological defense of those killings.
5. Sikh community as a whole was responsible for the violence in Punjab.
6. Sikhs should have done nothing in self-defence but showed patience and tolerance against the killer mobs.
7. These were Sikh intellectuals and not killer mobs which were responsible for the massacre. They had turned Sikhs into a militant community, cutting them off from their Hindu roots, thus inviting attacks from the nationalist Indians. Moreover, he treated all Sikhs as part of the same gang and described attacks on them as a reaction of the nationalist Hindus.
8. Shockingly, ‘Moments of Soul Searching’ was not meant for Indian state or killer squads but demanded from victim Sikhs.

Nana Deshmukh awarded ‘Bharat Ratna’ (the Jewel of India), the highest national award

As if it was not enough injustice to the martyrs and survivors of the 1984 massacre, on the eve of the 2019 Republic Day RSS-BJP rulers of India, bestowed the highest national award Bharat Ratna (the gem of India) on Nana Deshmukh. Indian Prime Minister Modi praising Deshmukh said, “He personifies humility, compassion, and service to the downtrodden. He is a Bharat Ratna in the truest sense.

[https://x.com/narendramodi/status/1088814319670910977?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1088814319670910977%7Ctwgr%5E0f83dbb514514c5dc975094e5590494af1f3a84f%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.republicworld.com%2Findia%2Fpm-modi-hails-nanaji-deshmukh-on-bharat-ratna-honour-says-his-contribution-to-rural-development-showed-the-way-for-a-new-paradigm-of-empowerment]

This article is an appeal to all citizens from North America and the United Kingdom on the truth behind the RSS: Mohan Bhagwat its supremo is visiting USA, Canada and UK and needs to be confronted with these facts.

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

[1] The present supremo Mohan Bhagwat and even the present prime minister of India, Narendra Modi have been groomed in the same mould.

[2] The above selection of Manu’s Codes is from F. Max Muller, Laws of Manu, LP Publications, Delhi, 1996; first published in 1886. The bracket after each code incorporates number of chapter/number of code according to the above edition.

Related:

51st Anniversary of Emergency in India: While the RSS supported the Emergency, it now ruthlessly presides over an ‘undeclared Emergency’

Disclosure and transparency from the RSS may finally expose decades-old ambiguities

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

The post Mohan Bhagwat, the RSS’ supremo to lead ‘Universal Oneness Celebrations’ in New York! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Sabrang India has accessed the latest letter through the Kashmiri Pandit Sangharsh Samiti (KPSS) but is withholding publication for security risks and reasons. The communication which names around half a dozen Kashmiri Pandits and identifies their residential locations in different parts of Jammu. The individuals have been described as “white collar terrorists” and “traitors” allegedly working for their “masters” in Delhi. The letter, purportedly signed by an individual named Ahmed Bilal and issued in the name of the United Liberation Council (ULC), carries an explicit warning: “wherever you are and wherever you go, we are watching your every move.”

Security agencies are examining the authenticity of both letters and attempting to identify those behind them. Officials have previously suggested that the ULC could be another front or shadow organisation of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT). The group first surfaced publicly in July, when it issued a poster marking the death anniversary of Hizbul Mujahideen commander Burhan Wani, according to officials cited by The Indian Express.

What makes the latest communication particularly alarming is its apparent attempt to establish a distinction within the Kashmiri Pandit community itself. The letter reportedly claims that Kashmiri Pandits who remained in the Valley after the mass migration of the 1990s are not its target and are “safe”. Its threats are instead directed at those who migrated and subsequently returned to Kashmir for government employment, as well as individuals accused by the letter of attempting to implement an “RSS agenda” in the Valley. That distinction is significant because the latest threats appear closely tied to the government’s rehabilitation and employment programme for displaced Kashmiri Pandits.

The detailed report on the first threatening letter may be read here.

A second letter, a deeper concern

The latest communication follows an earlier threat letter circulated online earlier this month. That letter reportedly named Kashmiri Pandit employees working in the Revenue Department and published their phone numbers. According to The Indian Express, the communication attempted to associate their government duties with the seizure of properties allegedly linked to terrorists.

The first letter had already triggered significant security concerns. The Jammu and Kashmir administration reportedly instructed departments to allow Kashmiri Pandit employees to remain away from work and advised them to stay alert and move to safer locations if necessary. There was, however, no publicly available formal order governing the reported work-from-home arrangement. Different accounts placed the period of leave at August 20, August 25 or until Independence Day.

The second letter changes the nature of the threat. The earlier communication exposed telephone numbers. The latest reportedly exposes residential addresses, down to the house and street level. According to the Indian Express, officials said this is the first time in several decades that threat communications targeting Kashmiri Pandits have reportedly contained such precise residential information. That raises a question that goes beyond the contents of the letters themselves: how are individuals issuing anonymous threats gaining access to such detailed information?

Sanjay Tickoo: ‘How can the government talk about return when it cannot guarantee safety?’

Speaking to Sabrang India on the second threat letter, Sanjay Tickoo, president of the Kashmiri Pandit Sangharsh Samiti, sharply questioned the political narrative around the return of Kashmiri Pandits to the Valley. He pointed specifically to remarks by Jammu and Kashmir BJP General Secretary (Organisation) Ashok Koul, who, while speaking in Shopian, described the return of Kashmiri Pandits as a positive development but said that targeted killings would not stop and that the community would have to face challenges and struggle while rebuilding their lives in Kashmir. For Tickoo, the statement exposes a fundamental contradiction. “How can he say targeted killings won’t stop?” he asked, arguing that if the government accepts targeted violence as an unavoidable reality, then the Union government must also acknowledge the failure of its security and rehabilitation policies rather than celebrating the return of Kashmiri Pandits without addressing the risks they face. He questioned the idea of presenting the return of Pandits as a success while employees continue to fear for their lives.

Tickoo also pointed to what he described as an even more alarming development in the second letter: additional personal information has reportedly been exposed, including the registration number of one employee’s vehicle. According to him, this suggests that the problem may extend beyond information already available on social media and raises questions about possible leaks from within the departments where Kashmiri Pandit employees work. He argued that the increasing presence of PM Package employees across government departments has made them more visible, but also potentially more vulnerable, particularly if confidential information is being accessed by people within or around those institutions. Tickoo questioned the government’s repeated attribution of the threats to an alleged Lashkar-e-Taiba offshoot without first establishing how such precise information is reaching those issuing the threats.

He also raised concerns about overground workers (OGWs) and the security network within government institutions. Referring to reports that hundreds of suspected OGWs had been re-arrested ahead of Independence Day, Tickoo drew a parallel with the 1990s and claimed that, based on his experience, people associated with overground militant networks have existed across different government departments. His concern, he said, is not about labelling individuals without evidence, but about the inability of ordinary employees to know who may have access to their personal information or who can potentially compromise their security. If the government says the threats originate from a LeT-linked group, he asked, how can it establish that conclusively rather than simply attribute every such incident to an organisation operating from across the border?

For Tickoo, the government’s handling of the work-from-home arrangement further demonstrates the problem. Even after the first threat letter, he said, there was no clear official communication informing Kashmiri Pandit employees that they could work from home. The decision was instead conveyed informally, with Independence Day security arrangements becoming an additional reason for employees to remain away from their workplaces. Now that the second letter has emerged, Tickoo said, there is again no clarity over whether employees are expected to return to their offices or continue working from home. “What now?” is the question confronting employees who have already been named and identified.

At the heart of Tickoo’s concern is what he describes as a security problem that may be internal as much as external. The government may identify a militant organisation behind the threats, but that does not answer how the names, phone numbers, residential addresses and even vehicle details of vulnerable employees are reaching those circulating the letters. Tickoo argues that the increasing visibility of Kashmiri Pandits employed across government departments under the PM Package must be accompanied by a corresponding system of protection and data security. Otherwise, the very employment programme intended to facilitate rehabilitation could make employees easier to identify and target.

He also questioned the repeated denial of threats by the Union government and the Lieutenant Governor’s administration since 2019. If authorities continue to insist that there is no broader threat to Kashmiri Pandits, Tickoo asks, how will the latest series of threats, the circulation of increasingly detailed personal information and the continuing fear among employees ever be addressed? For him, the issue is no longer simply whether another threat letter is genuine. It is whether the State is prepared to acknowledge the insecurity faced by the community—and take responsibility for making its promised return to the Valley genuinely safe.

Notably, in his conversation with Sabrang India after the first threat emerged, Tickoo had argued that the latest threat cannot be treated as an isolated incident. For him, the more troubling question is how personal information of Prime Minister’s Package employees continues to reach those issuing threats. Tickoo said that lists containing the names and details of package employees have been circulating on social media for years, including after the 2022 threats, and alleged that the information being used in the latest episode is drawn from the same publicly available lists.

He said the government must establish how such information is being accessed and circulated and why, despite repeated meetings with the Home Department since 2022, no effective solution has emerged. He also pointed to the contradiction at the heart of the rehabilitation policy: employees are expected to return to Kashmir and continue living and working in the Valley, but when threats emerge, they are asked to remain indoors or leave for safer locations. “If such situations happen, Kashmiri Pandits feel unsafe and then move out,” Tickoo said, arguing that they then risk losing the limited benefits attached to a package that requires them to continue living and working in the Valley.

He further questioned the absence of a formal government order directing employees to stay home, suggesting that authorities often avoid putting such decisions in writing because doing so would amount to acknowledging a security failure and could invite legal scrutiny. For Tickoo, the said episode is therefore not merely about another threat letter; it is about the erosion of confidence in the security establishment and the growing contradiction between asking Kashmiri Pandits to return and failing to make that return secure and sustainable.

The detailed report may be read here.

The issue is particularly sensitive because the targeted employees are not simply members of the Kashmiri Pandit community. They are among those who have returned to the Valley under the government’s rehabilitation and employment framework.

Around 6,000 Kashmiri Pandits have been provided government employment under the Prime Minister’s Special Employment Package, introduced in 2010 to facilitate the return and rehabilitation of those displaced from Kashmir following the outbreak of armed insurgency in 1990. The package was designed around the idea that employment could help facilitate the community’s return to the Valley. But the latest developments expose the vulnerability at the heart of that model.

Employees are encouraged to return to Kashmir to work. Yet when threats emerge, they are advised not to attend their workplaces, remain indoors or move to safer locations. Those specifically named in the threats have reportedly been shifted to Jammu. The contradiction is increasingly difficult to ignore: a policy premised on return cannot be sustained if returning employees repeatedly have to be evacuated for their own safety.

The shadow of 2022

The latest threats also carry the memory of the violence of 2022. That year, militants carried out a series of targeted attacks against Kashmiri Pandit employees, killing five. The attacks triggered prolonged protests by employees appointed under the Prime Minister’s Package, who demanded that they be transferred out of the Valley and posted in Jammu. The government did not agree to permanently transfer them to Jammu. Instead, employees were moved to locations in Srinagar and other parts of the Valley considered comparatively safer. The protests exposed a fundamental disagreement over the meaning of rehabilitation.

For the employees, safety was a precondition to remaining in Kashmir. For the government, continued employment in the Valley remained central to the rehabilitation framework. The latest threats have brought that unresolved tension back to the surface.

‘This threat should not be taken lightly’

The seriousness of the situation has also been acknowledged by the political leadership. After the first letter had surfaced, Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah had warned that the threats against Kashmiri Pandit employees could not be taken lightly, particularly given the history of targeted killings of minorities in the Valley.

He said that some employees had wanted to leave following the earlier threats but had effectively been confined to their camps for security reasons. According to NDTV, he called for action against those responsible and urged authorities to ensure the safety of Kashmiri Pandit employees.

National Conference president Farooq Abdullah, after the first threat, called for the Union Home Ministry to investigate the threats and questioned why Kashmiri Pandits have been specifically targeted when people of different faiths continue to live and work in Kashmir. He also questioned the use of social media to circulate the threats and asked who was behind the communications.

Security concerns are widening

The threats have emerged amid a broader deterioration in the security environment in parts of Kashmir. On July 22, a policeman was killed in Anantnag town after terrorists allegedly fired at him at close range. Nine days later, on July 31, two migrant workers from Chhattisgarh were killed at a brick kiln in Kulgam. The incidents have contributed to renewed concerns about the vulnerability of civilians, migrant workers and minorities.

The security environment has also affected the Amarnath Yatra. The pilgrimage began on July 3 and was scheduled to continue until August 28. The traditional Anantnag-Pahalgam route was suspended on July 23, while the Yatra was subsequently curtailed and suspended from August 9. Officials cited low pilgrim footfall, weather advisories and repair work on the tracks among the reasons for the changes. It is against this backdrop that the second threat letter has surfaced.

Related:

How Can Rehabilitation Work If We Are Not Safe?’ Sanjay Tickoo on the fresh threat to Kashmiri Pandit employees

This is what we feared: Sanjay Tickoo on the rising attacks in Kashmir since March

Pleas of non-migrant Kashmiri Pandits have fallen on deaf ears: Sanjay Tickoo

Time has come to go on fast unto death: Sanjay Tickoo

Kashmiri Pandit leader Sanjay Tickoo talks about Governor’s Rule in J&K

A Kashmiri Pandit fact-checks The Kashmir Files

10 reasons why Kashmiri Pandits feel betrayed in the Valley

The post ‘Wherever You Go, We are watching’: Second threat letter to Kashmiri Pandits appeared first on SabrangIndia.

A Bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and K Vinod Chandran, in Shiv Pratap Singh alias Chinu v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others, held that the defect goes to the very foundation of the penal legislation: the Act defines a “gang” and a “gangster”, but does not create a separate crime corresponding to those definitions.

The Court consequently quashed the proceedings under Sections 2 and 3 of the Act against two advocates, Shiv Pratap Singh and Himanshu Srivastava, while making it clear that any independent offences allegedly committed by them under the IPC or other penal statutes can continue to be prosecuted under those laws.  The judgment turns on a basic principle of criminal law: there can be no punishment without an offence created by law.

‘Punishment prescribed without an offence being created’

The Court examined Section 2 of the UP Act, which defines “gang” and “gangster”. The definition of a gang encompasses persons acting singly or collectively through violence, threats, intimidation, coercion or otherwise for purposes including disturbing public order or gaining undue temporal, pecuniary or other advantage. It then lists 25 categories of activities.

The problem, according to the Bench, is that the activities covered by those clauses are already offences under other penal laws. Kidnapping, drug trafficking, human trafficking and the other activities falling within Section 2(b), for instance, are punishable under the IPC or other specific penal enactments. The UP Act does not transform them into a new offence merely because the person committing them is characterised as a member or leader of a “gang”. The Court therefore drew a sharp distinction between defining a status and creating an offence.

“After defining gang, which includes commission of the offences listed under sub-clauses (i) to (xxv) and defining gangster as a member or leader or organiser of a gang, the punishment is prescribed for a gangster without an offence being created by statute; which makes the penal act, stillborn.” (Para 43)

In other words, the existence of an underlying crime may justify prosecution under the law that actually criminalises that conduct. But, in the Supreme Court’s analysis, the Gangsters Act cannot simply attach a further criminal punishment to the person’s classification as a “gangster” when the Act itself has not created such an offence.

The Court emphasised that it was concerned only with the proceedings under Sections 2/3 of the Gangsters Act, and not with the substantive criminal cases registered under other laws. If an accused is alleged to have committed an offence under the IPC or another penal statute, those proceedings must continue in accordance with the law applicable to that offence.

Gang chart cannot become a substitute for legislation

A central part of the judgment concerns the gang-chart mechanism under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Rules, 2021. The Court found that the statutory scheme effectively allowed the executive to determine who would acquire the status of a “gangster” for the purposes of punishment. Yet, according to the Bench, determining what conduct constitutes a crime and attaching penal consequences to it is a function reserved for the legislature.

“A ‘gangster’ is defined under the Act and the determination of who a gangster is, for the purpose of punishment, is as prescribed in the Rules, left to the ipsi dixit of the Executive. The creation of crime, or to make an act or omission subject to penal consequences as an offence, is essentially a legislative function and it cannot be thrown away and left to sprout in the thickets of subordinate legislation.” (Para 54)

The Court held that this function cannot be delegated to subordinate legislation. The Rules may prescribe procedure; they cannot create a crime which Parliament or the state legislature itself has failed to create in the parent statute. The preparation of a gang chart, therefore, could not supply the missing offence.

The Bench held that using the gang chart to punish a person for conduct already covered by other penal statutes, independently of prosecution under those laws, would exceed the power conferred by Section 23 of the Act. It would effectively permit the same criminal conduct to be punished again under another enactment merely by assigning the accused the status of a gangster.

Concern over pre-trial incarceration and ‘foregone conclusion’

The Court was particularly troubled by the consequences of the gang-chart system. It noted that inclusion in a gang chart could lead not merely to the initiation of proceedings but to arrest and prolonged pre-trial incarceration, followed by trial and punishment on the basis of the very same material contained in the chart.

The Bench compared this to the English proverb: “Give a dog a bad name and hang him.”

The Court’s concern was that the executive’s determination of a person’s status as a gangster could effectively become the foundation for the subsequent criminal process, even though the statute had not itself created the offence for which punishment was being imposed.

The judgment also noted that the statutory framework could enable investigation and filing of the chargesheet to be delayed, thereby extending pre-trial incarceration for up to a year. The Court described the Gangsters Act as having been portrayed as an alternative to preventive detention, but without the safeguards that accompany preventive-detention legislation.

The comparison was significant. The Court pointed out that preventive detention, despite being permissible in appropriate circumstances, is surrounded by strict procedural safeguards because it rests substantially on executive satisfaction. Those safeguards include statutory time limits, supply of material to the detenue, opportunities for representation and scrutiny by an Advisory Board.

The Gangsters Act, the Bench observed, did not provide equivalent safeguards while permitting detention merely on the basis of inclusion in a gang chart and subsequently permitting trial and punishment on the same foundation.

“As we noticed, the provisions of the Act could lead to a detention of the accused without trial for long, which is akin to a statute enjoining preventive detention. Though preventive detention has been held to be permissible even in the teeth of Article 21, the same is hedged with safeguards, which are held to be sacrosanct and even a minor procedural violation would entail release of the detenu. The safeguards in preventive detention are numerous, since it is the subjective satisfaction of the Administration and the Police that leads to a detention, the period in which such detention continues being the exclusive premise of the State Government, who also has the authority to release the detenu at any point of time. The period provided in which such detention order has to be forwarded to the State Government; the materials to be supplied to the detenu; the right of representation to the various authorities, at every stage, as granted to the detenu; the reference to an Advisory Board constituted by statute and the decision to be arrived there at within a time frame, mitigates and erases to an extent the rigour & malice of subjectivity, which subjectivity pervades a preventive detention order. The subject enactment, the U.P. Act not only permits detention for a period without anything more than the inclusion in a Gang Chart but also enables a trial and punishment on the basis of the very same Gang Chart, in addition to the pre-trial incarceration, but without an offence being created by the Act itself. It is akin to the English proverb: ‘Give a dog a bad name and hang him’.” (Para 54)

Article 20(1): No punishment without an offence

The Court anchored its reasoning in Article 20(1) of the Constitution, which prohibits conviction for an offence except for violation of a law in force at the time the act was committed and also prohibits the imposition of a greater penalty than that prescribed at that time. The Bench invoked the Latin maxim “nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege” — no crime and no punishment without law.

The Court relied on its earlier decisions, including Keshavan Madhava Menon v. State of Bombay, Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh v. State of Vindhya Pradesh, Union of India v. Ganpati Dealcom Pvt Ltd and CBI v. R.R. Kishore, to reiterate the broader principle that criminal liability must have a legal foundation.

Among the principles distilled by the Court were that a later statute cannot turn an act that was previously innocent into a crime, cannot retrospectively increase punishment for an offence already committed, and that procedural changes can operate on pending matters only where they do not create a new offence or new punitive exposure.

Although Article 20(1) was not being applied in a conventional retrospective-criminalisation setting, the Bench said its principle was relevant because the question before it was whether a person could be tried and punished for an “offence” that did not exist in the penal statute.

Why Maharashtra and Gujarat laws survived the comparison

The Supreme Court also considered the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 and the Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime Act, 2015. The comparison, however, was not an endorsement of either statute. The Court noted that those enactments expressly create offences such as organised crime and prescribe the conditions necessary for invoking their penal provisions. In Mahipal Singh v. CBI, for instance, the Court had considered the Maharashtra law’s requirement of “continuing unlawful activity”, including the filing of more than one chargesheet within the prescribed period and cognizance by a competent court.

That, the Bench found, was precisely what was missing from the UP legislation. The Court also referred to its earlier decision in Shraddha Gupta v. State of Uttar Pradesh, where it had held that even a single crime could be sufficient to invoke the UP Gangsters Act. That judgment had distinguished the Maharashtra and Gujarat statutes, which contain additional requirements relating to continuing or repeated criminal activity. But the specific question of whether the UP Act actually creates an offence had not been decided then.

The present judgment therefore addressed what the Court described as a question that remained res integra before the Supreme Court, despite the Allahabad High Court Full Bench having rejected the challenge.

Two advocates get relief

The ruling arose from two separate proceedings. Shiv Pratap Singh, a practising advocate, had become embroiled in a dispute concerning elections to the Fatehgarh Bar Association in Farrukhabad. Following disciplinary proceedings by the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh and a subsequent criminal complaint, an FIR was registered in 2023 under various IPC provisions. In February 2024, the police registered a separate FIR under the Gangsters Act against Singh and two others, accompanied by a gang chart. Singh was named as accused No. 3. The Supreme Court made clear that it was not adjudicating the underlying Bar Council or Bar Association dispute. Its concern was the validity of the proceedings under the Gangsters Act and Rules.

The second appeal was filed by Himanshu Srivastava, against proceedings involving him, his brother and his father, who was alleged to be the gang leader. An FIR registered in Ghaziabad under Sections 2/3 of the Gangsters Act referred to various previous criminal cases and described Srivastava’s father as the gang leader.

In both matters, the Supreme Court confined itself to the proceedings under the Gangsters Act. It did not extinguish liability for any independent offence under the IPC or other penal laws.

‘Violence’ in the name of preventing violence

The judgment ends with one of its most striking observations. Taking a cue from the George Orwell quotation placed at the beginning of the judgment — “Those who abjure violence can do so only because others are committing violence on their behalf” — the Bench said:

“Before we leave the matter, we take a cue from the quote of George Orwell, we extracted at the outset, to find that the enactment under scrutiny on the pretext of adjuring violence, is in fact perpetuating it on un-suspecting citizens.” (Para 59)

The observation captures the Court’s central objection. The problem was not the State’s stated objective of combating criminal gangs. The Bench expressly acknowledged that curbing the menace of criminal gangs is a laudable objective. But, it said, the end cannot justify the means when a penal law interferes with the liberty of citizens without first establishing, through legislation, the offence for which they are to be punished.

The Supreme Court accordingly allowed both appeals and quashed the Gangsters Act proceedings in the two cases. It directed that the appellants be released forthwith if they were in custody and not required in any other case; where they were already on bail, their bail bonds were ordered to stand cancelled.

The judgment, however, provides that while the UP Gangsters Act proceedings cannot survive, but criminal proceedings for the underlying offences under the IPC or other penal statutes are unaffected and may proceed independently.

A judgment that stops short of the constitutional question

The judgment’s most significant limitation, however, lies in what the Court expressly chose not to decide. The challenge to the Gangsters Act was not confined to the question whether the legislation created a distinct offence. The constitutional validity of the enactment had also been questioned before the Allahabad High Court, which had rejected those challenges in a Full Bench decision. The Supreme Court, however, made it clear that it was not examining that aspect of the matter.

The Bench expressly stated that it had neither upheld the Full Bench decision nor rejected the constitutional challenges considered by it. Those questions, it said, would remain open for consideration. That qualification is important. The Court has described the statutory scheme in deeply critical terms: it found that the Act enables punishment without creating an offence, permits proceedings to rest on a gang chart prepared through an executive process, and creates the possibility of detention and prosecution on the basis of a status conferred by the authorities. Yet it stopped short of determining whether that architecture itself violates the Constitution.

The result is therefore not a declaration that the UP Gangsters Act is unconstitutional. The Court’s holding is narrower, though consequential: in its present form, the Act cannot sustain a prosecution because it does not create an offence to which its penal provision can attach. That leaves open an important question for the future. If the statutory defect is sought to be cured by legislative amendment, the broader constitutional objections to the Gangsters Act may still have to be answered. The Supreme Court’s judgment does not resolve them.

In that sense, the decision is both a sweeping indictment and a limited ruling: the Court has dismantled the legal foundation on which prosecutions under the existing Act rest, while deliberately leaving open the constitutional validity of the regime itself.

The complete judgment may be read here.

Related:

Misuse of UP’s Gangsters Act: HC seeks IO’s response

Lawyer booked for sedition, 28 booked under Gangsters Act

HRD & lawyer Mohammed Shoaib among two other activists in Varanasi picked up: UP

Allahabad HC slams DM for declaring a woman “gangster” for having 2 FIRs against her

Liberty on Hold: Delays turn the promise of justice into punishment

The post Supreme Court: UP Gangsters Act ‘stillborn’ for prescribing punishment without creating an offence appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Bengaluru, Aug. 18: “The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls being conducted in various states, including Karnataka, is not merely a process of revising electoral rolls. It is a ‘Nazi-Fascist project’ aimed at disenfranchising voters and implementing the NRC through the backdoor. It is being driven by political leaders who are behaving in a fascist manner,” said senior retired IAS officer M.G. Devasahayam, who has studied the SIR process in this special interview to Kannada daily, Vartabharati.

M.G. Devasahayam, a retired IAS officer and member of the Constitution Conduct Group, has extensive experience in electoral processes and the electoral reforms required in the country. He also played an important role in bringing to light issues related to alleged vote manipulation and vote theft during the 2024 elections. In an exclusive interview with Vartha Bharathi, he spoke about the SIR process being conducted in Karnataka and several other states.

Interviewer: What is the reason for such a large number of voters being deleted during the SIR process in Karnataka? Is the problem with the process itself or with the very concept behind SIR?

Devasahayam: “SIR is a fraud on the democratic process. The way it has been designed itself is not an honest process. The Election Commission has not properly designed an SIR in accordance with the rules, regulations and constitutional provisions. According to information revealed through the RTI, SIR was not decided upon by the Election Commission of India itself.

“They have openly said, ‘We did not decide this.’ If that is the case, perhaps political leaders such as the Home Minister decided it and imposed it on the Election Commission of India. In my opinion, the Chief Election Commissioner is someone who can easily succumb to political pressure, while the other two Election Commissioners exist only in name.

“Normally, all three are IAS officers. We know how IAS officers function. We know how a scheme is formulated, how its structure is designed and how it is subsequently implemented. SIR has not been properly designed, nor has its structure been properly worked out. It is now being implemented hurriedly and in an extremely improper manner.

“They wanted to bring the NRC—the National Register of Citizens. There were massive protests against it, so they had to withdraw it.

“There are two objectives behind conducting SIR. One is to implement the NRC through the backdoor using the Election Commission. The second is to disenfranchise people. Who are likely to be disenfranchised? Those who are not organised, minorities and people who do not have documents.

“Therefore, the entire process has been conducted in an extremely improper and bizarre manner. The objective is to disenfranchise as many people as possible who are less likely to vote for the ruling party and to implement the NRC through the backdoor.”

Interviewer: So, did they begin this process without framing any proper rules? Is the mapping under SIR constitutionally valid?

Devasahayam: “Yes. That is why there is complete confusion everywhere. Instead of adding voters, the process is resulting in people being excluded from the electoral rolls. Whenever any programme designed for the people is implemented, it must be practicable and capable of being implemented effectively.

“Do you have to link it to what happened in 2002–03? They are asking whether you were there in 2002, whether your parents were there, and to establish a relationship based on that. That was 23 years ago. How can this be done practically?

“For example, I am now 85 years old. I moved from Tamil Nadu to Bengaluru four years ago. Since I am no longer in Tamil Nadu, my name has been removed from the electoral roll there. But nobody here has contacted me. How am I supposed to prove where I was in 2002? I was in Chennai in 2002, and my parents are no longer alive. They died before 2003. Therefore, this mapping is a questionable process.

“Coming to the constitutional aspect, the Constitution guarantees universal adult suffrage. It must be an inclusive process. Every citizen who is eligible to vote must be included in the electoral roll. The right to vote is also a fundamental right and a human right. If there is serious doubt about whether someone is a citizen and it is proven that the person is not an Indian citizen by birth or through any other means, only then can that person be excluded from the electoral roll.

“Otherwise, I am an Indian citizen. I was born here about 85 years ago. I have been living here. I am an Indian citizen. Why should I have to prove it? What should I show to prove it? Since I am an educated person, I may have some certificates. But millions and crores of people do not have certificates. They do not have school certificates, degree certificates or other documents.

“This is a rotten fascist-Nazi project.”

“Another problem is that the entire process has been left completely in the hands of government officials. BLOs are lower-level government staff. The entire process has been placed in their hands. It has reached a stage where an Anganwadi worker is expected to determine whether you are a citizen or not, and whether you are a voter or not.

“The role of higher-level officials has been reduced to a mere formality. The entire process has been turned into a completely bureaucratic exercise. Shouldn’t there be verification and auditing for such a massive process? Even ordinary small-scale activities are subject to verification and audits. So, for such a huge process, there should be a social audit, as we suggested right from the beginning.

“Social audits are conducted at gram panchayats and ward levels in cities. People themselves should come together. The draft electoral roll should be placed before them. They know who is there and who is not.

“Who is best placed to know who lives in a village and who its citizens are? It is the people of that village. Therefore, a Gram Sabha should be convened. The draft electoral roll should be read out and the people should be asked, ‘This is the list we have prepared. Is it correct?’

“They may say, ‘This person does not live here; they have moved elsewhere.’ Then that person can be removed. At the same time, they may say, ‘This person has been living here for many years, but their name is not on the list.’ Then that person can be added.

“After that, the panchayat should sign off on it in an open meeting. Once it is approved, it should become the final electoral roll.”

Interviewer: But where do these BLOs go? Do they visit apartments?

Devasahayam: “For example, they have still not come to my apartment. There are about 90 homes in my apartment complex. I was told that the BLO came to the manager, sat there for a short while and left. But I did not receive an enumeration form. Now they may have deleted my name from the electoral roll or may not have included me. Across the country, more than 5–6 crore people have already been removed.

“I believe that around one crore people in Karnataka will be left out of the draft electoral roll.

“Now the question is: What kind of process should we call this? I believe even the Supreme Court approved this without properly understanding the issue. This rotten process should be stopped immediately and rejected completely. I do not even want to discuss this any further.”

Interviewer: In this situation, what would you like to tell the Karnataka government and the people?

Devasahayam: “After seeing the chaos in Bihar, West Bengal and other states, we expected that this would come to Karnataka as well. Therefore, we had taken precautionary measures. I was guiding people from civil society. I told them to demand a social audit. Karnataka is a suitable state for conducting a social audit because it has a strong tradition in the Panchayati Raj system.

“On the other hand, Karnataka also has a State Election Commission. Just like the Election Commission, it can also play a role in preparing a proper and credible electoral roll. Therefore, the process should be initiated through the State Election Commission, involving panchayats and ward committees. A proper social audit should be conducted through them.

“That would give people confidence. No one should be left out of the electoral roll. People should have the confidence that their vote exists. If someone has been removed, it must be ensured that it was done for a genuine and justifiable reason.

“We held a series of discussions with political leaders on this issue because political parties should have been involved. We had a meeting with the Deputy Chief Minister. He is now the Chief Minister. All of them said, ‘Yes, it is a good suggestion. We will do it.’

“In some villages, it was even implemented on a trial basis. A note was also prepared. But before taking the final decision, they said, ‘We have to get permission from the high command.’

“One of them went to Delhi with this proposal. But the high command sabotaged it. The Congress high command office is filled with RSS elements. I do not want to name them. Some of the people surrounding Rahul Gandhi are RSS agents. They immediately sabotaged the proposal. My allegation is that they have joined hands with the RSS to disenfranchise as many voters as possible.

“If the state governments had been given the freedom to take an independent decision, they might have done it. They could have passed a resolution and even amended the process to make social audits mandatory. But according to the information I have, the high command sabotaged it.

“The Congress is behaving very strangely on this issue. They too have joined hands with RSS elements. They have not put up any strong resistance on this issue. Their approach is one of verbal opposition but inaction in practice.

“As a result, lakhs and crores of people in Karnataka too are going to be deprived of their right to vote. This is not democracy. This is a fraud being carried out in the name of democracy. That is the reality.

“Civil society has done whatever it could. But political parties have abandoned the people in the worst possible manner. Whatever happens, civil society organisations must not abandon the people. They must continue to put pressure on the Congress government. Sooner or later, all of this will come to light.”

(The original of this interview was published in Kannada by Vartabharati. The original may be read here.)

Related:

‘Forum for Electoral Integrity’ petitions NHRC over mass voter disenfranchisement under SIR

The Bihar Verdict 2025: How an election was engineered before votes were cast

Civil society warns, Election Commission is “Undermining Democracy”

The post “SIR is a Nazi-Fascist Project:” M.G. Devasahayam appeared first on SabrangIndia.