According to The Indian Express, Justice Suraj Govindaraj directed the FRRO to verify the identity of Abdul Rahim and ascertain whether he is the same individual who was convicted by a sessions court in Uttar Pradesh in a case alleging illegal entry from Bangladesh. The conviction is currently under challenge before the Allahabad High Court.

In an interim order, the copy of which is yet to be made available, the court restrained the authorities from deporting Rahim until the next date of hearing, fixed for July 14. The court also directed the FRRO to obtain instructions regarding the pending proceedings before the Allahabad High Court and determine whether those proceedings relate to the same person against whom the present deportation order has been passed.

Detained during verification drive

As reported by Indian Express, Rahim stated in his petition that he was born on April 14, 1979, in New Seemapuri, Delhi, and has lived and worked in India throughout his life. He was detained on March 5, 2026, by the Parappana Agrahara police during a drive to identify suspected undocumented Bangladeshi migrants and was subsequently handed over to the FRRO.

On the same day, the FRRO passed an order under Section 7(2)(f) of the Foreigners Act, 2025, read with Paragraph 8 of the Immigration and Foreigners Order, restricting his movement and directing that he reside at the Utile Foundation detention centre in Kothanur, Bengaluru. The FRRO order identified him as “Md. Rahim Howladar, son of Md. Motaleb Howladar,” and proceeded on the assumption that he was a foreign national.

Citizenship documents produced before court

Appearing for Rahim, advocate Clifton D. Rozario argued that his client is an Indian citizen by birth and produced several public documents, including a birth certificate, passport, voter identity card, Aadhaar card, PAN card, driving licence and records relating to his family members.

The petition contended that the detention order was passed without notice, without an opportunity of hearing and without any meaningful inquiry into his citizenship status. It alleged violations of Articles 14, 15, 21 and 22 of the Constitution and stated that the detention had disrupted Rahim’s livelihood and caused hardship to his wife and infant child.

Connection to Uttar Pradesh conviction

The case has an additional layer of complexity because Rahim was convicted in 2012 by an Additional District and Sessions Judge in Ghaziabad under Section 14A(b) of the Foreigners Act, 1946, for allegedly entering and residing in India without valid documents. In that case, he was identified as “Abdul Rahim, son of Shah Jamal, resident of Bagerhat, Bangladesh.”

According to the petition, Indian Express reported, the conviction was largely based on the statutory burden under the Foreigners Act requiring the accused to establish citizenship, and on the finding that the documents produced were not satisfactory. Rahim appealed the conviction before the Allahabad High Court in 2012, where the appeal was admitted and he was granted bail. The appeal remains pending.

Rozario argued that the present detention and deportation proceedings amount to double jeopardy, prohibited under Article 20 of the Constitution, which protects individuals from being prosecuted and punished more than once for the same offence.

Business and family life in Bengaluru

Rahim told the court that he moved from Delhi to Bengaluru in 2014 and established a waste management and scrap trading business through a government-registered proprietorship. He also holds a GST registration certificate issued under the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

As reported by Times of India, he argued that he has built his family and economic life in Bengaluru and that the deportation proceedings were initiated without even issuing him a prior notice.

Court seeks identity verification before deportation

Observing that the petition raises issues requiring factual verification, the Karnataka High Court directed the FRRO to ascertain Rahim’s identity before taking any coercive action. The court’s interim protection will remain in force until the matter is heard again on July 14.

According to the report of Scroll, the petition seeks quashing of the FRRO order and Rahim’s release from custody, while the court’s immediate focus remains on determining whether the detainee is indeed the same person involved in the pending Uttar Pradesh proceedings and whether the deportation order has been issued against the correct individual.

Related:

Gauhati High Court upholds foreigner declaration, rejects mental illness plea

Gauhati HC upholds foreigner declaration, reasserts harsh reverse burden under colonial-era Foreigners Act

No ‘Inherited’ Foreigner Status: Gauhati HC protects children from automatic declaration

Gauhati High Court directs State to file affidavit on alleged deportation of Doyjan Bibi without due process

When a Spelling Error Can Cost Citizenship: Supreme Court stays deportation of five Assam women

From Forest Settlers to ‘Encroachers’: The eviction crisis in Assam’s Taungya Villages

Assam, the third state to pass UCC: Gender justice or targeted communalism the aim?

The post Karnataka HC stays FRRO deportation order over disputed citizenship claim appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Background of the case and procedural history

 The appellants, Mayadhar Nayak and Baina Nayak, were daily wagers belonging to the Scheduled Castes, who served the Government Treasury Branch of SBI in Bhubaneswar as cleaners and sweepers for approximately three decades, starting in 1994 and 1995, respectively.

The appellants had previously approached the Court in 1999 regarding non-regularisation of service and denial of pay on par with temporary employees. This produced an interim protective order on October 28, 1999 where the Court said, “If there is work for the Petitioners, they may not be retrenched.” The Court had directed the Bank to pay them remuneration under the Minimum Wages Act and be allowed to continue working as long as work was available, without being substituted by new hands. The Court also asked the bank to consider their cases for regularisation if any vacancies arose.

In 2007, the appellants again approached the Court claiming that the Bank was seeking to fill up the posts of Sweepers and other menial staff without considering their claim for appointment. This time too, the Court asked the bank to consider their cases for regularisation if any vacancies arose, keeping in view the length of their engagement and the services.

In terms of the above order, Appellants were paid on September 17, 2021 the arrears of minimum wages quantified at Rs.1, 61,619/- , each, for the period between April, 2017 & June, 2021.

Around five years later, in 2012, the appellants filed another petition for their recognition as temporary employees, pay parity under the principle of ‘equal pay for equal work’, release of bonus for the financial year 2011–12, and extension of all temporary service benefits as granted to similarly situated employees of the Bank.

In 2020, the appellants another petition seeking regularisation of their services, contending that the Bank had regularised the services of a similarly situated employee engaged as a ‘Liftman’ at the time, the appellants were receiving a consolidated monthly remuneration of Rs.16,406/- while other temporary employees of the Bank were receiving Rs.27,443/-.

On June 20 2025, a single judge bench Justice S.K. Panigrahi which was hearing both the petitions together dismissed the appellants’ writ petitions finding all their claims unsustainable. The judgment read:

“While this Court does not disregard the long and uninterrupted service rendered by the petitioners, it is well-settled that mere length of service does not by itself confer a right to regularisation. The consistent position in law is that engagement on a daily wage or casual basis, however prolonged, cannot mature into a claim for regular appointment in the absence of sanctioned posts and adherence to a lawful selection process.” (Para 18).

In 2022, the Bank had sought permission to retrench the Appellants as being surplus workers.

On July 19, 2025, the appellants were retrenched by the bank as surplus workers under Section 25F of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and were paid roughly Rs. 3.31 lakh each as statutory compensation and payment due to a policy shift toward outsourcing driven by IT developments in banking.

The division bench presently hearing the case, had to decide whether

• the appellants, after nearly 30 years of service were entitled to regularisation and consequential monetary benefits,
• the previous court orders, which only directed the payment of minimum wages and conditional consideration for vacancies, barred the appellants’ current claims for regularisation, and
• what constitutes fair ‘remediable and reparative justice’ for manual labourers in an era of outsourcing and AI, when regularisation might impose an excessive financial burden on the employer.

High Court’s intervention

 The Division Bench partially allowed the appeals and set aside the order of the Single Judge through an order on May 18, 2026. In that it said:

“There appears to be a prima facie case for granting relief to the Appellants herein, who admittedly have put in service as Sweepers, first Appellant from 1994, and the second from 1995. The law, as it now stands in the June of its life, tilts in favour of the Appellant’s herein, inasmuch as, arguably, the impugned order of the learned Single Judge has missed the march”

• Declined Regularisation

The Court declined to order regularisation. Reliance was placed on Supreme Court’s rulings in Jaggo v. Union of India (2024), and Shripal v. Nagar Nigam (2025) but the Court noted it would cause the Bank to bear the brunt of losing huge money and that the appellants’ prior cases only resulted in a direction for minimum wages. At the same time, the Court observed that the appellants’ earlier rounds of litigation had not secured them much real benefit, since those orders only directed payment of minimum wages, which SBI had already paid. Because of this, the Bench held that the regularisation claim in the present appeals was, to an extent, barred by the principle of res judicata.

The Court then referred to a coordinate Bench’s order in Secretary, Berhampur Cooperative Central Bank Ltd. v. Bhaba Sundar Dalai (2026), where Rs 10 lakh had been awarded as compensation in lieu of regularisation. However, the Bench distinguished that case as there was no res judicata bar in it, and the employees’ service was comparatively shorter.

The Court took note of two mitigating factors specific to the present appellants, that they had roughly ten years left before superannuation, and that both belonged to Scheduled Castes, as relevant considerations in shaping the final relief.

• Justification for the Compensation Amount

In the May order, the Court had suggested both the sides to negotiate a settlement with fairness and justice. The SBI proposed to pay a lump sum compensation of Rs. 5 lakh to each of the appellants to settle the dispute. However, the appellants rejected the bank’s offer and during a personal interaction with the Court, they stated they would settle for Rs. 25 lakh each

The Court evaluated both proposals and described the Bank’s Rs. 5 lakh offer inadequate. It said:

“Rupees 5 lakh offer made by the Bank as compensation is too frugal to be mentioned, when bread is costlier than blood, Rupee value now-a-days dwindling down. The Appellants, who have given their sweat & blood, cannot seek gainful employment elsewhere at their present declining age. They were working only as sweepers with not much education nor with due social status.” (Para 7.3.2)

Instead, the Court awarded a lump sum compensation of Rs. 20, 00,000 (Twenty Lakh) to each appellant in lieu of regularisation and continued service.

While deciding the compensation amount, it remarked:

“In the AI era, we are not sure that they would be able to eke out their livelihood, having spent prime of their life blood in the menial job all these years. Even Rs.10 lakh compensation awarded by the Coordinate Bench to the workmen of a Cooperative Bank would not constitute a solid yardstick for determining what should be paid to these poor persons. Should Appellants be regularized in service, it would incur more expenditure than otherwise.” (Para 7.3.2)

The Bank was ordered to pay the total Rs. 40 lakh within eight weeks. Any delay would trigger an interest penalty (1% for the first month and 2% thereafter), which the Court directed should be recovered personally from the erring bank officials.

The full judgment may be read here:

Why Regularisation Never Came

 The Fifth Schedule to the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, that designates certain practices as unfair labour practices includes:

 “10. To employ workmen as “badlis”, casuals or temporaries and to continue them as such for years, with the object of depriving them of the status and privileges of permanent workmen.”

 For thirty years, and over 240 days annually, the appellants discharged their duty in continuity. For context, the Government Treasury Branch of the Bank occupies more than 11,000 square feet, spread over three levels comprising the upper basement, ground floor, and first floor. The premises include eight toilets and six urinals. The Appellants had been performing cleaning duties in the said premises along with outsourced employees.

The denial of regularisation and long-term benefits to contractual or temporary workers is a heavily litigated issue in India, and not unique to the present case. In Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (2006) the Court clarified that temporary, daily wage, or contractual employees do not possess a legal or fundamental right to be made permanent. It held that a court cannot issue a writ of mandamus to make a worker permanent because the worker has no enforceable legal right to such a status, and the State has no legal duty to provide it outside of established rules. However, the Court also provided a narrow exception as a one-time measure for workers who have completed at least 10 years of service. Regularisation, it held, may be permitted where the appointment was irregular (meaning it suffered from a procedural flaw) but not illegal.

In Jaggo v. Union of India (2024), the Supreme Court said that the appellants’ long and uninterrupted service, for periods extending well beyond ten years, cannot be brushed aside merely by labelling their initial appointments as part-time or contractual. The essence of their employment must be considered in the light of their sustained contribution, the integral nature of their work, and the fact that no evidence suggests their entry was through any illegal or surreptitious route. The judgment read:

“The claim by the respondents that these were not regular posts lacks merit, as the nature of the work performed by the appellants was perennial and fundamental to the functioning of the offices. The recurring nature of these duties necessitates their classification as regular posts, irrespective of how their initial engagements were labelled. It is also noteworthy that subsequent outsourcing of these same tasks to private agencies after the appellants’ termination demonstrates the inherent need for these services. This act of outsourcing, which effectively replaced one set of workers with another, further underscores that the work in question was neither temporary nor occasional.” (Para 13)

In Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. vs Brajrajnagar Coal Mines Workers Union (2024), the Court held that workers engaged to perform work of regular and perennial nature cannot be treated as contract labour.

Similarly, last year, in Shripal vs Nagar Nigam (2025), the Supreme Court while acknowledging the precedence in Umadevi, emphasised that workers performing duties that are integral, ongoing, and perennial to an institution’s functions should not be relegated to perpetual daily-wage status. The judgment authored by Justice Vikram Nath said:

“While the judgment in Uma Devi (supra) sought to curtail the practice of backdoor entries and ensure appointments adhered to constitutional principles, it is regrettable that its principles are often misinterpreted or misapplied to deny legitimate claims of long-serving employees. This judgment aimed to distinguish between “illegal” and “irregular” appointments. It categorically held that employees in irregular appointments, who were engaged in duly sanctioned posts and had served continuously for more than ten years, should be considered for regularization as a one-time measure. However, the laudable intent of the judgment is being subverted when institutions rely on its dicta to indiscriminately reject the claims of employees, even in cases where their appointments are not illegal, but merely lack adherence to procedural formalities.” (Para 26).

“Indian labour law strongly disfavours perpetual daily-wage or contractual engagements in circumstances where the work is permanent in nature. Morally and legally, workers who fulfil ongoing municipal requirements year after year cannot be dismissed summarily as dispensable, particularly in the absence of a genuine contractor agreement.” (Para 15).

To continue extracting regular labour for decades while pleading a lack of sanctioned strength is a position the Court found legally and morally unsustainable in Dharam Singh vs State of UP (2025).

In January this year, in Bhola Nath vs The State Of Jharkhand (2026), the Court while finding the State’s refusal to regularise the workers who had served for over a decade to be a clear derogation of equality principles, directed the State to forthwith regularise the appellants against the sanctioned posts they were initially appointed to, granting them all consequential service benefits

Hence, while long service alone does not guarantee automatic regularisation, the Supreme Court has ruled that continuing workers in identical, perpetual roles on temporary wages while denying them benefits can be considered arbitrary and discriminatory.

During the litigation, the appellants in present case- Mayadhar Nayak supported his wife, two children, and a father aged about 80 years. On the other hand, Baina Nayak was the sole caretaker of a mentally and physically disabled child and another son, all of whom dependent on his meagre income of about Rs 16,000.

On paper, the Nayaks had reason to expect a better outcome. They approached the High Court as early as 1999 where a coordinate bench even secured them protection against retrenchment in 1999, and in 2007 the Court directed SBI to consider them if sweeper vacancies were filled. Yet each of these interventions never fruitioned into regularisation.

When two vacancies did arise after the 2007/2008 orders, SBI chose to outsource the cleaning function rather than fill the posts departmentally citing a policy shift attributed to changes in banking operations. Because this outsourcing decision was never independently challenged, it stood, and it extinguished the very condition on which the appellants’ continued engagement depended. Rather than terminating long-serving casual workers outright, the restructuring of the underlying work itself dissolved the employee’s along with the post. By the time the Division Bench heard the 2025 appeals, it held that the earlier 2007/2008 orders had already adjudicated.

Compensation and Delayed Justice

 Regularisation would have given the appellants a pension, medical benefits, promotional prospects, and crucially continued income until superannuation. A one-time payment, however large, is a terminal substitute.

 None of this is to say compensation is worthless. Rs20 lakh each is a materially significant, life-altering sum, and the Court’s insistence on interest for delay and personal liability of erring officials for that interest is a genuinely useful enforcement mechanism. But as a systemic remedy for decades of institutionalised casualisation, compensation calculated case-by-case, in peculiar facts and circumstances, explicitly disclaiming precedential value, plausibly should not substitute for either a binding regularisation scheme or statutory reform that removes employers’ incentive to keep essential, perennial work permanently temporary! While salary or lump-sum compensation prevents destitution, it does not cure systemic exploitation. Compensation is at best a consolation, and workers deserve justice, not just money. Compensation does little to restore lost career opportunities, dignity and security.

 “The Appellants have been fighting the legal battles since about three decades, complete justice eluding for one or the other reason,” acknowledged the Orissa High Court in the present case.

This is not unusual. Delay is a common feature of our judicial system. Labour disputes in India typically take somewhere between seven to ten years to reach a final judgment. Pendency of labour disputes in general for long period of time leads to frustration among workers.

The Delhi High Court recently flagged this delay directly, describing the backlog of pending labour matters before constitutional courts as a “sorry state of affairs” in the constitutional courts where the “poor labourers are forced to fight tooth and nail to get justice for themselves”. Reported the Indian Express.

Labour Law in the AI-era

 Tucked into the judgment’s compensation calculus, the Bench doubted the appellants could “eke out their livelihood… in the AI era,” having spent their working lives in menial labour with little education. This, on one level, was an acknowledgment that older, low-skilled workers pushed out of long-term employment have genuinely diminished prospects of re-entering the labour market. But it is worth reading as part of a broader, nascent judicial awareness that automation and technological change will compound the harm of insecure employment for low-skill, manual roles.

A public employer that outsources or automates a function bears a one-time restructuring cost but the displaced worker bears a lifetime cost, often without the education or capital to pivot into new work. The Court’s remark implicitly recognises this asymmetry, even if it does not translate it into a legal standard.

“Perennial nature of work” as a legal test may itself be eroding. Much of the jurisprudence on regularisation and contract labour assumes that if work is genuinely permanent, it should attract permanent labour protections. But work that was perennial for thirty years can be redefined as time-limited or eliminable through outsourcing plus technology, without ever being tested against the perennial nature standard in a contested proceeding.

Indian courts have long tied the right to livelihood, and by extension dignity, to Article 21. It would perhaps be an overreach to describe this as an emerging AI-era jurisprudence. But future litigants representing displaced casual workers in automating sectors like banking, toll collection, municipal sanitation may well cite this observation as an early judicial acknowledgment that technological displacement deserves distinct legal weight. The judges however have made it clear that this order is based on the facts of this case and they do not intend to make it a binding precedent or a Rule of Parity.

(The legal research team of CJP consists of lawyers and interns; this judgement primer has been worked on by Tanishka Shah)

Related

India’s New Labour Codes: A critical appraisal

Labour Rights Endangered: Four labour codes passed without worker or state governments’ consultation or consent

Noida Protest 2026: A labour uprising the state refused to understand

Lucknow: Caste hierarchies & contract labour exploitation among sanitation workers

The post The Orissa High Court awards them Rs 20 lakh each to two SBI Sweepers appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Read the judgment primer by CJP here.

“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” wrote the historian Lord Acton. Critics argue that legal protections governing the prosecution of offences by uniformed personnel have fostered a culture of impunity by making accountability more difficult. Over the years, members of India’s armed, paramilitary and police forces have been implicated in a range of serious offences against civilians, including rape, extrajudicial killings, staged encounters, culpable homicide, enforced disappearances, illegal detention, and custodial torture.

The 1991 in the villages of Kunan and Poshpora in Kashmir, the army personnel allegedly raped over 23 women in Kashmir (Human Rights Watch assessed the number of survivors at up to 100). It is gut wrenching but it is by no means the only one. In 2004, a 32-year old activist Thangjam Manorama was allegedly raped and murdered by the Indian paramilitary unit 17th Assam Rifles in Manipur. Following this, around twelve elderly women staged a naked protest outside the Assam Rifles headquarters. Their banner read: ‘Indian Army Rape Us.’

CREDIT: BBC News

In 2009, two women from Shopian in Kashmir were allegedly abducted, repeatedly gang-raped by soldiers, and murdered. Their bodies were recovered from a river.

In 2010, a 16-year-old Zahid Farooq Sheikh was shot and killed by BSF personnel as he was walking home from playing cricket with friends in Srinagar.

In 2015 and 2016, a National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) fact-finding report documented three instances of mass sexual violence including gang-rapes, physical assault, and looting by police and paramilitary personnel deployed on anti-Maoist operations in Chhattisgarh. The victims were Adivasi women, subsistence farmers. The report concluded that there had been a breakdown of discipline among the forces concerned.

In 2021, soldiers from the 21 Para Special Forces army unit shot and killed six coal miners in Nagaland’s Mon district, for mistaking the miners for militants.

These are only a few cases that reached the media. The structure of the law and the barriers to FIR registration in conflict areas means that for every case that surfaces, an unknown number do not.

In 2018, over 350 army personnel filed a petition in the Supreme Court to protect the AFSPA from being diluted. Its defenders argue that soldiers operating in counter-insurgency environments face split-second, life-or-death decisions. They are trained not to open fire unless they are fired upon, attacked, or have reasonable grounds to believe an attack is imminent. AFSPA was enacted in 1958 to enable the deployment of the armed forces in areas where the civil administration had failed to maintain law and order.  The legal protection under AFSPA is therefore justified, they contend, because actions taken during combat cannot be judged with the benefit of hindsight.

The criticism, however, is not that soldiers acting in good faith during genuine combat operations should be prosecuted. It is that the shield of prior sanction has repeatedly been invoked to protect those accused of abusing that power.

For instance, in Manorama’s case mentioned before, the post-mortem revealed injuries consistent with torture, including bullet wounds on her vagina. Most significantly, the Central Forensic Science Laboratory detected human semen on her clothing, suggesting that she had been sexually assaulted before her death. Yet the Assam Rifles invoked Section 6 of AFSPA to argue that no legal proceedings could continue without prior sanction from the Central Government. Manorama’s family questioned how acts such as rape, torture and the killing of an unarmed woman could ever be considered actions taken ‘in aid of civil power’ or in the exercise of official duty.

The full Human Rights Watch report can be accessed here.

Put very simply, there is no operational rationale for extending immunity to those who have abused the power, and specifically in the offence of rape. Unlike the use of force during an armed encounter, rape can never be characterised as a split-second military judgment or an act committed in good faith in the discharge of official duties. It is an intentional criminal act. The law offers no convincing explanation for why allegations of rape should be subject to the same procedural immunity as decisions taken during armed engagement.

According to Margot Walstrom, Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict, “[Sexual violence] is a way of demonstrating power and control. It inflicts fear on the whole community. And it is unfortunately a very effective, cheap and silent weapon with a long lasting effect on every society.”

A 2019 paper titled ‘Violence against women by the army personnel’ reads, “Many in Mizoram do not even talk about those days when such trauma was so prominent as to bring gushes of trauma to them. Those instances have been simply called “troubles” and no discussion takes place, such is the trauma that has been inflicted on people.”

In India’s conflict zones, sexual violence has long been dismissed as ‘collateral damage.’ As an unfortunate but inevitable cost of maintaining order in disturbed areas. However, it arguably is a documented, recurring pattern of abuse that is shielded by law and enabled by institutional silence.

The severity and persistence of the reports surrounding rapes by uniformed personnel compelled the Justice Verma Committee constituted in the wake of the 2012 Nirbhaya gang-rape to specifically examine the position of women in conflict areas and recommend a review of the AFSPA. The committee explicitly said that women in conflict areas are entitled to all the security and dignity that is afforded to citizens in any other part of our country.

That was over fifteen years ago.

In the intervening period, India has overhauled its criminal law framework wholesale, replacing the Indian Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the Evidence Act with new statutes  expressly on the ground that the old laws were colonial relics. But the provisions of AFSPA, the Border Security Forces (‘BSF’) Act, the Army Act 1950, and the Disturbed Areas Act 1992 that shield uniformed personnel from prosecution for crimes committed against civilians remain untouched.

The Legal Architecture

Several statutory provisions form the backbone of security force immunity in India.

Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (now Section 218 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita ) requires government sanction before a court can prosecute judges and public servants, including armed forces and police officials, for offenses committed while discharging official duties unless the Central Government first grants sanction for prosecution. The Ministry of Home Affairs is vested with the authority to grant sanction for prosecution of public servants.

Section 47 of the BSF Act provides that BSF personnel accused of serious civil offences including  murder, culpable homicide not amounting to murder, or rape against civilians cannot ordinarily be tried by an internal Security Force Court, unless the offence was committed on active duty, outside India, or at a location specifically notified by the Central Government. Read alongside the sanction requirement, this provision can operate as a gap between two forums where civilian courts are barred without sanction and military courts barred by the section itself.

Similarly, Section 70 of the Army Act, 1950 specifies when military personnel cannot be tried by a court-martial for certain serious crimes against civilians.

According to section 6 of the AFSPA no prosecution, suit, or legal proceeding may be brought against any person acting under AFSPA without the prior sanction of the Central Government. This provision has operated in parts of the Northeast since 1958 and in Jammu and Kashmir since 1990.

How have the Courts acted?

In Sebastian Hongray v. Union of India (1984), the petitioner, a student from the Naga community contended that two men were unlawfully detained by the 21st Sikh Regiment during a combing operation in Huining village of Manipur. The Army could not produce or account for two men taken into custody and asserted that the men had left the army camp alive and that an extensive search, including a CBI enquiry, had failed to locate them in Manipur. The Court applied habeas corpus directly against the Union of India and later imposed exemplary costs. The Court said:

“As we are inclined to direct registration of an offence and an investigation, we express no opinion as to what fate has befallen to Shri C. Daniel and Shri C. Paul, the missing two persons in respect of whom the writ of habeas corpus was issued save and except saying that they have not met their tragic end in an encounter as is usually claimed and the only possible inference that can be drawn from circumstance already discussed is that both of them must have met an unnatural death. Prima facie, it would be an offence of murder. 

….

 It is not necessary to start casting a doubt on anyone or any particular person. But prima facie there is material on record to reach an affirmative conclusion that both Shri C. Daniel and Shri C. Paul are not alive and have met an unnatural death. And the Union of India cannot disown the responsibility in this behalf.”

A decade later, in Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa (1993), the Supreme Court confronted the death of a man after arrest by the police. With characteristic directness, the Court held that the doctrine of sovereign immunity used to shield the State from civil liability has no place in proceedings for the enforcement of fundamental rights and that:

“There is a great responsibility on the police or prison authorities to ensure that the citizen in its custody is not deprived of his right to life. His liberty is in the very nature of things circumscribed by the very fact of his confinement and therefore his interest in the limited liberty left to him is rather precious. The duty of care on the part of the State is strict and admits of no exceptions.”

“A reading of the morning newspapers almost everyday carrying reports of dehumanising torture, assault, rape and death in custody of police or other governmental agencies is indeed depressing,” was the Court’s observation in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1996) in which it issued a comprehensive set of binding guidelines governing arrest, documentation, medical examination, and notification of family members, and held that violation of these guidelines would render police officers personally liable for contempt of court. The Court reiterated that defence of sovereign immunity is not available to the State for the tortious act of the public servants and for the established violation of the rights guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

In Naga People’s Movement of Human Rights v. Union of India (1997), the Supreme Court constitutionally upheld the validity of AFSPA. It also curated a list of ‘Do’s and Don’ts,’ in which the use of excessive force or retaliatory force by the Manipur Police or the armed forces of the Union was not permissible.

However, the provision that ASPA’s protection was not absolute and that it did not grant a ‘licence to kill indiscriminately’ remained a judicial aspiration rather than an enforceable limit.

Significantly in 2012, a division bench of Justices BS Chauhan and Swatenter Kumar while hearing the Pathribal case at the Supreme Court orally remarked that AFSPA gave very limited protection confined to action in discharge of duty and that rape and murder committed by its personnel should be considered a normal crime. The Court said that there is no question of sanction from the government before prosecution of offenders in such cases. Reported The Indian Express.

“You go to a place in exercise of AFSPA, you commit rape, you commit murder, then where is the question of sanction? It is a normal crime which needs to be prosecuted, and that is our stand,” the bench said.  However, ultimately the Court held that where AFSPA’s protection applies, prior sanction from the Central Government is required before the criminal court can take cognizance of the offence but if the competent Army authority opts for trial by court-martial, no such sanction is needed.

In 2013, the Supreme Court affirmed that the power of the armed forces to seek trial before a General Security Force Court is not unlimited. In the case concerning the killing of a teenager by BSF personnel, a Bench of Justices Chandramauli Prasad and Ibrahim Kalifulla set aside a Jammu and Kashmir High Court order that had transferred the trial to a General Security Force Court under the BSF Act, 1968. The Court described the allegations against the accused as “very distressing” and held that merely because the personnel were on active duty in a disturbed area did not automatically entitle the BSF to claim jurisdiction. The Court also held that the commanding officer’s discretion to seek trial before a security force court was not absolute and had been exercised without considering the statutory restrictions requiring such a course to be necessary in the interest of discipline.

In Extra-Judicial Execution Victim Families Association (EEVFAM) v. Union of India (2016), the Court examined 1,528 alleged encounter killings by police and armed forces in Manipur between 1979 and 2012. A court-appointed Justice Hegde Commission investigated six cases and concluded that none were genuine encounters and that the security forces had exceeded their powers.

While hearing the case, a bench of Justices Madan B Lokur and U U Lalit rapped the Army for silence over the allegations and questioned the state government for not proceeding with these cases against them. “Don’t you want to inquire even if somebody makes such allegations against your people (Army personnel)? Are you saying whatever was done was legitimate,” the bench asked. “The reports clearly suggest that the girl was subjected to rape. You are creating a stonewall and you do not want to break that stonewall. You have not tried anything. You have not asked the Army to handover the custody of the alleged culprits,” the Court added.

In its 2017 judgment, the Supreme Court held that even in a disturbed area under AFSPA excessive or retaliatory force is prohibited and ordered every death caused by the armed forces or police to be thoroughly enquired into.

“It does not matter whether the victim was a common person or a militant or a terrorist, nor does it matter whether the aggressor was a common person or the State. The law is the same for both and is equally applicable to both,” the order read.

The EEVFAM litigation remains alive as a continuing mandamus.

Still, it is relatively uncommon for allegations of rape against armed forces personnel to culminate in prosecution before ordinary civilian criminal courts. Instead, cases have often been dealt with through the military courts, if dealt at all. When convictions have resulted from court-martial proceedings, civilian High Courts have generally examined them in the exercise of judicial review rather than hearing the criminal case at first instance.

In Captain Vinod Kumar vs State of J&K (2012), the Jammu and Kashmir High Court heard the case of two members of the 8th Battalion JAKLI who allegedly broke into a residential house in Poonch and repeatedly raped two women, aged 18 and 24, in front of the victims’ young children. The Army’s Commanding Officer initially opted in 1999 for the accused to be tried by a civil criminal court rather than a Court-martial. However, the petitioners challenged this. The Court ruled that the trial should not be abandoned and rejected the idea that army personnel should go ‘Scott free’ due to procedural errors. It famously noted that “Crime does not die in this manner” and emphasized that the seriousness of a rape charge outweighs technical procedural wrangles.

In 2014, a division bench of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court upheld the sentence by the Summary General Court Martial which found four army personnel guilty of rape and sentenced them to ten years of rigorous imprisonment and dismissal from service. The Court ruled that Court Martial proceedings can only be invalidated if there is a breach of fundamental procedural rules that renders the trial illegal. The Court emphasized that there cannot be “any compromise with the standards and maintenance of discipline in the army. They are not only the sentinels of the frontiers of the country but are also sacred guards of the rights of the people. Any invasion of the rights of the people by this kind of force cannot be tolerated.”

Where the Courts have deferred.

Despite this increasingly robust jurisprudential framework limiting blanket immunity under AFSPA, accountability has remained elusive. More than three decades after the alleged mass rapes in Kunan and Poshpora, judicial and investigative orders have been repeatedly challenged, stayed, or left unresolved. In 2015, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court stayed the Magistrate’s order directing further investigation after objections by the Army. Separately, the State challenged the recommendation of the Jammu and Kashmir State Human Rights Commission awarding compensation to the survivors before the Supreme Court. In its report, the Commission observed that the Director General of Police had attempted to “push the collective crime committed by the army personnel under the carpet” and that the medical evidence pointed towards gang rape. Following the abrogation of Article 370, the State Human Rights Commission itself ceased to exist, while the compensation proceedings remain pending before the Supreme Court and the criminal proceedings continue to languish without final adjudication. Reporter The Outlook.

The litigation in Extra Judicial Execution Victim Families Association (EEVFAM) continues as a court-monitored process nearly a decade after the Supreme Court’s landmark rulings. Thangjam Manorama Devi’s case, despite forensic evidence suggestive of sexual assault and repeated judicial scrutiny, has similarly failed to result in criminal prosecution. In these cases justice has been deferred through prolonged litigation, jurisdictional objections, repeated appeals, and institutional inaction. The consequence is much the same that is the promise of accountability remains suspended indefinitely.

According to Rishika Arora and Iyina Grover, there is a requirement for a new protocol for protecting the women in an armed conflict. Women’s participation in the drafting of future laws and their appointment as judicial officers in army tribunals are essential steps. The concept of the court martial must be women-oriented.

The Justice Verma Committee recommendations are as follows:

1.  Sexual violence against women by members of the armed forces or uniformed personnel must be brought under the purview of ordinary criminal law;
2. Special care must also be taken to ensure the safety of women who are complainants and witnesses in cases of sexual assault by armed personnel;
3. There should be special commissioners – who are either judicially or legislatively appointed – for women’s safety and security in all areas of conflict in the country. These commissioners must be chosen from those who have experience with women’s issues, preferably in conflict areas. In addition, such commissioners must be vested with adequate powers to monitor and initiate action for redress and criminal prosecution in all cases of sexual violence against women by armed personnel;
4. Care must be taken to ensure the safety and security of women detainees in police stations, and women at army or paramilitary check points, and this should be a subject under the regular monitoring of the special commissioners mentioned earlier;
5. The general law relating to detention of women during specified hours of the day must be strictly followed;
6. Training and monitoring of armed personnel must be reoriented to include and emphasize strict observance by the armed personnel of all orders issued in this behalf;
7. There is an imminent need to review the continuance of AFSPA and AFSPA-like legal protocols in internal conflict areas as soon as possible. This is necessary for determining the propriety of resorting to this legislation in the area(s) concerned; and
8. Jurisdictional issues must be resolved immediately and simple procedural protocols put in place to avoid situations where police refuse or refrain from registering cases against paramilitary personnel.

Those recommendations remain unimplemented.

The Supreme Court has already suggested that AFSPA’s protection is limited to acts conducted in the line of duty, and that offences such as rape and murder are ordinary crimes that do not require special courts. The incorporation of these suggestions remains awaited because the nation will not fully deliver on its constitutional promise until its laws place all citizens, including those in its border areas and conflict zones, on an equal footing before justice.

“The primary task of the armed forces of the Union is to defend the country in the event of war or when it is face with external aggression. Their training and orientation defeat the hostile forces. A situation of internal disturbance involving the local population requires a different approach. Involvement of armed forces is handling such a situation brings them in confrontation with their countrymen. Prolonged or too frequent deployment of armed forces for handling such situations is likely to generate a feeling of alienation among the people against the armed forces who by their sacrifices in the defence of their country have earned a place in the hearts of the people,” said the Court in  Naga People’s Movement of Human Rights in 1997.

Nearly three decades later, that warning remains as relevant as ever.  The Mizoram conviction in the 2017 case is still, in this landscape, a welcome anomaly even though it took the Court nine years to reach a decision because it shows what the system is capable of.  The guarantee that every woman in a conflict area who files a complaint will have her case heard by a court that is independent of the institution she is accusing is perhaps the minimum that the Constitution already promises and what the Mizoram court, in its judgment of June 2026, briefly delivered.

(The legal research team of CJP consists of lawyers and interns; this judgement primer has been worked on by Tanishka Shah)

Related

Revisiting the Justice Verma Committee report of 2013: #JusticeForRapeVictims

The story I never got to tell – of rape and torture by the Indian army

NHRC issues notice to MoD for compensating victim of Army’s “indiscriminate” firing

Will Army Court Martial Captain who allegedly took money to stage Shopian ‘encounter’?

Second Case in a Month: Another minor alleges torture in Gujarat police custody, cop and sanitation worker booked

Bombay High Court orders FIR in Somnath Suryawanshi custodial death case, slams police for delay and bias

The post Promising Principles Poor Outcomes: What the judicial record on security force accountability actually shows appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The statement has elaborated on the provisions of international humanitarian law that recognises that even in times of war, humanity must prevail, the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols grant special protection to hospitals, ambulances, medical personnel, and rescue workers, recognising that those who dedicate their lives to saving others must never become targets of armed conflict. These fundamental and noble principles have been repeatedly and systematically violated by Israel, the occupying Power, says the statement.

“The destruction of healthcare infrastructure has reached catastrophic proportions. Hospitals have been bombed, besieged, and rendered inoperable. Ambulances have been attacked while attempting to rescue the wounded. Doctors, nurses, and paramedics have been killed, injured, or detained while performing their humanitarian duties.

“As of today, only 19 of Gaza’s 34 hospitals remain partially operational, operating under impossible conditions, while severe shortages of medicines, medical equipment, fuel, electricity, and clean water continue to push the healthcare system toward total collapse. In the occupied West Bank, repeated military incursions, restrictions on movement, and shortages of essential medicines have severely disrupted healthcare delivery, with approximately 11,000 surgical procedures reportedly postponed, placing thousands of patients’ lives at further risk.

“This humanitarian catastrophe is not an inevitable consequence of war; it is the result of Israel’s systematic dismantling of the Palestinian healthcare system upon which millions of Palestinian civilians depend for their survival.

“The world witnessed the tragic fate of six-year-old Hind Rajab, who was targeted by the Israeli army after remaining trapped for hours. The Palestine Red Crescent ambulance sent to rescue her, despite prior coordination with Israeli authorities, was also attacked, killing the two paramedics. A recent United Nations Independent International Commission of Inquiry found reasonable grounds to believe that Israeli forces deliberately targeted both the family vehicle and the ambulance.

“Similarly, on March 23, 2025, the international community watched in horror as video evidence emerged documenting the Israeli killing of Palestinian rescue workers in Rafah while carrying out their humanitarian mission. These were not isolated tragedies, but part of a systematic pattern documented by the United Nations, the World Health Organization, and numerous international humanitarian organizations, and they represent only the tip of the iceberg.

“Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya, Director of Kamal Adwan Hospital and a respected paediatrician, has become the face of the resilience and humanitarian commitment of Palestinian healthcare workers. As northern Gaza’s healthcare system collapsed under repeated military assaults and siege, he chose to remain with his patients, refusing to abandon those who depended on his care.

“His personal sacrifice became even more profound when he lost his own son, Ibrahim, who was killed during the assault on Kamal Adwan Hospital. Despite this devastating personal tragedy, Dr. Abu Safiya returned almost immediately to caring for his patients, embodying the highest ideals of the medical profession.

“On December 27, 2024, following the assault on Kamal Adwan Hospital-the last functioning hospital in northern Gaza-Israeli forces detained Dr. Abu Safiya, together with members of the medical staff and patients, under Israel’s Unlawful Combatants Law. Since then, he has remained in Israeli detention. His continued detention has become a matter of grave international concern.

“Yesterday, July 8, 2026, United Nations Special Rapporteurs and independent human rights experts called for Dr. Abu Safiya’s immediate release, expressing serious concern over credible reports that he has been subjected to torture, other forms of ill-treatment, prolonged solitary confinement, denial of adequate medical care, and a severe deterioration in both his physical and psychological condition. The experts further emphasized that his detention appears to be arbitrary and urged his immediate release unless internationally recognized criminal charges are promptly brought against him.”

It is in light of these dire and precarious circumstances that the Palestinian embassy has issued the statement and appeal. The appeal calls on all Indians to support and join the call for the immediate and unconditional release of Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya; advocating for the protection of Palestinian healthcare workers, hospitals, ambulances, and medical facilities in accordance with international humanitarian law; supporting independent international investigations and accountability for attacks against medical personnel and healthcare infrastructure; and backing urgent international efforts to restore and strengthen the Palestinian healthcare system while ensuring the unhindered delivery of essential medical supplies and humanitarian assistance.

The continued detention of Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya is not merely the case of one physician. It symbolizes the broader assault on the Palestinian healthcare system and the humanitarian principles that underpin international law. Wider support can make a meaningful difference in defending these universal values.

Related:

Israel, United States & and other complicit entities guilty of genocide, ecocide, and forced starvation in Palestine: International People’s Tribunal

Gaza: 700 citizens demand release of detained Madleen activists, call upon UK to fix Israel’s accountability for genocide, blockade, war crimes in Palestine

Illegality of the Israeli Occupation of Palestine

The post The arbitrary detention of Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya: A call for justice appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Despite a sewer, death happening every 45 hours in the country, shameless governments have chosen to remain in criminal silence. Needless to say, Dalit lives don’t matter for government and they have been turned into a new normal. How widespread this practice is can be understood by this simple fact that this year sewer and septic tank deaths have been reported from 16 states across the. Increase in number of deaths in sewers and septic tanks have been alarming over the last decade. While in 2016 only 39 deaths were reported, this figure jumped by 350% next year in 2017 to a staggering 137 deaths.

After various Supreme Court Judgments and the subsequent passage of the ‘Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act’, 2013, one would have expected the governments to be proactive. However, SKA has documented 1726 deaths since the new act came into force. Among them 1203 deaths came just from seven states—Tamil Nadu (332), Gujarat (216), Delhi-NCR (157), Maharashtra (155), Uttar Pradesh (148), Haryana (104) and Bihar (91). Despite such high numbers, none of these states have taken even a single step to stop these deaths.

NAMASTE (National Action for Mechanised Sanitation Ecosystem) scheme was launched by the Modi government in July 2023. The scheme had an allocation of Rs. 349.73 Cr though for building toilets. While, under Swachh Bharat scheme, government had already spent Rs 19 thousand Cr for building 12 Cr toilets. However, neither was the sanitation ecosystem mechanised, nor were dry toilets completely eliminated.

Ironically and unfortunately, all these years ministers in the Modi government kept denying these sordid facts in Parliament, stating, shockingly, that there were no deaths in the country due to Manual Scavenging. Clearly, the act meant or means nothing for them. It also shows, how much government values the lives of Safai Karmacharis, who are still considered to be untouchables.

The SKA has demanded that the Prime Minister intervenes immediately to announce a complete full stop to deaths inside sewers and septic tanks. The press release has been issued by Bezwada Wilson, National Convenor, SKA.

Related:

58 reported deaths in Gujarat in last 5 years: Union Govt data reveals deaths due to cleaning of sewers and septic tanks

Continuing deaths of sewer workers reveals a cynical culture of impunity

941 deaths while cleaning sewers, septic tanks: Centre informs Rajya Sabha

The post Though sewer deaths have crossed the 100 mark this year, government is silent: SKA appeared first on SabrangIndia.

According to Hindustan Times, the IDC will now examine the contents of the film and make recommendations to the Union government regarding any further action. The committee forms part of the government’s oversight mechanism for OTT platforms and digital publishers and comprises senior representatives from the Ministries of Information and Broadcasting, Home Affairs, Electronics and Information Technology, Law and Justice, Defence, External Affairs, Women and Child Development, along with other ministries or domain experts that the MIB may nominate. It is chaired by an authorised officer of at least the rank of Joint Secretary.

The latest development follows the government’s directive to ZEE5 to take down Satluj under Section 69A of the IT Act, read with Part III of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. Section 69A empowers the Central Government to block or disable public access to online content on grounds including the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, defence of India, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, or to prevent the commission of cognisable offences.

Unlike theatrical releases, which require certification from the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), OTT platforms fall outside the CBFC’s jurisdiction and are governed by Part III of the 2021 IT Rules. These rules extend a regulatory framework to publishers of online curated content and digital news, enabling the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to issue directions regarding online content under specified circumstances.

Government sources, quoted by PTI and Hindustan Times, stated that the takedown was prompted by “security concerns” and the obligations imposed on OTT platforms under the IT Rules. According to officials, the makers had originally submitted the film, then titled Punjab ’95, to the CBFC in 2022 for theatrical certification. The Board reportedly sought an unprecedented 127 cuts before granting certification. The filmmakers declined to accept those edits, following which the project remained stalled for several years before eventually being released directly on ZEE5 under the new title Satluj on July 3.

Officials told PTI that after the uncut version became available online, the government intervened and directed ZEE5 to remove it. “If they want to release the film in theatres and OTT, they should follow the laid down norms,” one official was quoted as saying by PTI.

Following the government’s direction, ZEE5 confirmed through an official statement on Instagram that Satluj would be “unavailable in India until further notice” due to “current developments”, without elaborating further. The platform thanked viewers for the overwhelming response the film had received following its release. While inaccessible in India, the film reportedly continues to be available internationally through ZEE5 Global.

The controversy has also highlighted the distinct regulatory regimes governing cinema and digital platforms. Newly appointed CBFC Chairperson Shashi Shekar clarified that the certification board had no role in the OTT release, observing that “OTT platforms don’t come under the jurisdiction of the CBFC.”

A film about one of India’s most important human rights cases

Directed by Honey Trehan, Satluj chronicles the life of Jaswant Singh Khalra, the prominent Punjab human rights activist who exposed the illegal cremation of thousands of unidentified bodies by the Punjab Police during the militancy and counter-insurgency period between 1984 and 1994.

Khalra was abducted outside his residence in September 1995 after documenting these disappearances and was never seen alive again. His case later became one of the most significant instances of enforced disappearance and custodial killing in India. In 2005, four Punjab Police personnel were convicted for his abduction and murder, and in 2007, the Punjab and Haryana High Court enhanced their sentences to life imprisonment.

Despite the historical importance of Khalra’s work, the film has faced repeated obstacles since its completion. Apart from the demand for 127 cuts by the CBFC, Punjab ’95 was also removed from the official line-up of the 2023 Toronto International Film Festival shortly before its scheduled premiere, without any public explanation from the festival organisers.

Detailed report may be read here.

Legal basis invoked by the government

The government’s action relies on the framework created under the Information Technology Act and the 2021 IT Rules. Part III of the IT Rules incorporates a Code of Ethics applicable to publishers of online curated content. The Code requires publishers to exercise due caution when content may affect India’s sovereignty and integrity, threaten national security, disturb public order, harm friendly relations with foreign States, or incite violence. It further requires publishers to be mindful of India’s multi-religious and multi-racial social context while depicting communities and sensitive subjects.

Notably, aspects of the Code of Ethics have themselves been the subject of constitutional challenges before various High Courts. The Bombay High Court had stayed certain provisions relating to governmental oversight under the IT Rules in 2021, a stay that the Madras High Court subsequently observed would operate across India. As reported by Mint, it remains unclear whether the Centre specifically relied upon the Code of Ethics while issuing the takedown direction to ZEE5, or whether the order rests exclusively on its powers under Section 69A.

More on IT Act may be read here and here.

Political and public backlash

The removal of the film has triggered sharp criticism from political leaders, filmmakers and free speech advocates. As reported by Scroll, Shiromani Akali Dal president Sukhbir Singh Badal described the decision as “not mere censorship” but “an assault on our collective memory, truth and freedom of expression”, arguing that Punjab must be allowed to confront its history rather than suppress it.

AAP leader Baltej Pannu similarly alleged that the removal was intended to prevent younger generations from learning about a painful chapter in Punjab’s past, claiming that both the BJP and Congress had an interest in suppressing the historical record.

Related:

From Punjab ’95 to Satluj: When cinema becomes a battlefield over history, memory and censorship

Satluj: A film encountered

Kerala’s LDF govt to defy Centre’s diktat, to screen all films as per schedule at IFFK

Erasing Resistance: How the CBFC is censoring films that challenge caste and state power

Safe harbour or shadow censorship? The battle over India’s digital speech

The telegram NEET case and the expansion of platform-level censorship in India

The post Centre escalates action against Satluj, refers film to high-level committee after ordering OTT takedown appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Sadly, some claim the Kho originates further ahead from the forests at Dadamandi-Dwarikhal but accepting this would render the historically significant Langurgad meaningless. Langurgarhi holds a prominent place in Uttarakhand’s history as it was here in 1790 that Garhwali soldiers, after a year of fierce fighting, forced the invading Gurkha forces to retreat. The site lies about 25 km from Dogadda town, at an altitude of roughly 2,700 meters. Langur-gad is named as it actually is sourced from the forests in the Langur Patti or Languri or Langurgarhi and its adjoining forests. It ends its journey traversing nearly 20 kilometres to a scenic place of Dogadda where it meets the other river emerging from Sila village forests near Lansdown. The new river emerges out of this confluence is known as Kho or Khoh.

Dogadda has long been a culturally and politically important town in Uttarakhand. It deserves official recognition as the origin point of the Kho River like Devprayag, the sacred confluence of the Alaknanda and Bhagirathi. The Uttarakhand government should take a clear decision on this matter by officially acknowledging Dogadda as the source place of river Khoh and ask the local bodies there to act fast to preserve its beautiful confluence.

The most important thing is that both these tributaries, Langurgarh and Silgarh, carry water year-round and are not mere seasonal streams. During the monsoon, they turn fierce and aggressive, carrying tons of stones and boulders. Nothing can stand against their force. Having grown up in Dogadda, my birthplace, I am witness to its beauty as well as fury since my childhood when these rivers ran crystal clear and their gentle murmuring turning into a roar during the rains. But today, when I look at Langurgad towards Dadamandi or Silgad towards Lansdowne, I actually feel depressed at their ‘plight’. They were the place where we really enjoyed walking around and watching their powerful fury during the monsoon. How, we would debate among ourselves as which is bigger or which carries more water and devastation.

Today, large resorts have taken over the riverbanks. Water is blocked at multiple points to create recreational pools for tourists. People drive their Thars and other SUVs straight into the riverbeds. The river’s entire character has changed. Uncontrolled mining has inflicted further damage. It is extremely painful to see big vehicles being washed on the river and passing through it at various places.

Visiting the confluence at Dogadda filled me with sorrow. This was once our childhood playground, where we watched the rivers swell with terrifying power during monsoons. Today, people stand inside both Silgad and Langurgad, blocking the flow to create private pools. The growing number of riverside resorts is making the problem worse. By the time the water reaches the main confluence, the situation is even more dire. At the junction, Silgad barely has any visible flow. Grass has overgrown the area, and sewage from nearby markets flows directly into it. A sign at the municipal sewerage plant claims ₹21 lakh was spent, yet locals say the untreated waste continues to pollute the river at the confluence.

Can the local municipality and Uttarakhand government not stop these unauthorised constructions along the riverbanks to keep it alive?

Can they not organize cleaning drives with community help?

Mountain Rivers particularly those we term as smaller ones, are inherently beautiful and while smaller in size or volume, they have life and energy. Their clear, bubbling waters reflect their vitality. Small rivers like these also flow close to farmers and local communities because they are directly linked to their daily lives. Farmers draw water easily from them, and people once bathed in natural deep pools known locally as “Dhandi”. Those natural pools have now vanished. Outsiders have built stone walls across the rivers, artificially altering their flow and character. Water is dammed everywhere so tourists can lounge for hours. Riverside resorts are drawing more visitors, turning the rivers into venues for parties and recreation.

After the confluence of Langurgad and Silgad at Dogadda, the newly formed Kho River flows towards Kotdwar, a town at the distance of about 10 kilometres. The stretch between Dogadda and Kotdwar is particularly scenic: the river winds through massive rocks and boulders. Because the riverbed is not easily accessible, the water remains remarkably clean.  Dogadda’s famous Durga temple provides a beautiful view of the river carving its way through huge rocks. This section also serves as a vital watering point for wild elephants. Herds are frequently spotted here, as the area forms an important part of Rajaji National Park.

By the time the Kho reaches Siddhbali temple in Kotdwar, its condition deteriorates. The river splits into several channels — some naturally, others turned into small bathing pools by visitors. Tourists throng the area. Men, women, and children search for spots to bathe. The riverbed is full of stones brought down during monsoon floods. Beyond Kotdwar, the river reaches Saneh Park and Saneh Road, marking the beginning of its journey through the plains. By now, it has been joined by a couple of local streams and appears fuller. Saneh Road, located on the Najibabad-Kotdwar railway line, lies in a forested zone frequented by wild animals and remains remarkably scenic.

In its final stretch, the Kho River crosses several small towns in Bijnor district of Uttar Pradesh. After traveling approximately 112 kilometres, it merges with the Ramganga River at Latifpur Bila (or Latifpur Ba) village in Dhampur tehsil. Honestly speaking, at the confluence, the Kho often appears larger than the Ramganga. This is because a massive dam at Kalagarh upstream drastically reduces the Ramganga’s flow, with water released only through barrages at a few points.

Interestingly, a barrage has also been constructed on the Kho River at Sherkot, about 25 km before the confluence. From here, an 82-km-long feeder canal supplies water to the Ganga. The main Ganga flows from Haridwar through Bijnor to Garhmukteshwar. At Haridwar’s Bhimgoda barrage, most of the Ganga’s water is diverted into the Upper and Lower Ganga Canals. The “divine” waters seen at ‘Har ki Pauri’ is actually canal water. The real, depleted Ganga can be seen near Chandi Ghat bridge, where the riverbed often lies almost dry. After Haridwar, the Ganga enters Uttar Pradesh at village Balawali in Bijnor district. Its course from Bijnor to Garhmukteshwar remains largely dry except during the monsoon.

This drying of rivers is devastating agriculture in the Gangetic plain. While large canals serve thousands of villages, fields along the natural river courses suffer severe water scarcity. At Garhmukteshwar Ganga water gets life from the direct water of Kho River released from Sherkot Barrage through its feeder Canal. Every day, 535 cusecs of water from the Sherkot Kho barrage travels through 82 kilometres long canal and merges with the Ganga at Tigri Ghat near Garhmukteshwar, helping keep the river alive in that region. However, excessive human interference with river waters — largely in the name of agriculture — is fundamentally altering their character and causing ecological damage. We have actually moved to a point where these rivers are increasingly being managed only to meet religious and tourism needs at specific ghats and pilgrimage sites, while the water for farming continues to decline due to climate change, rampant mining, and illegal construction of resorts and hotels along mountain streams. In effect, our rivers are being converted into entertainment zones, severing their vital connections with local communities, farmers, and indigenous people to cater to urban elite desires.

Read a previous report on the impact of religious tourism in Uttarakhand by the author here.

While the Kho River breathes new life into the Ganga near Garhmukteshwar, its main channel meets the Ramganga about 28 kms away at Latifpur Bila Ahatmali in Dhampur tehsil. Even here, multiple barrages on the Ramganga (after the Kalagarh dam) leave it depleted — and once again, the Kho revives it. The Ramganga then flows through Moradabad and Shahjahanpur before joining the Ganga at Hardoi, where the confluence area also resembles a desert. Further downstream, water reappears at Bithoor (22 km before Kanpur) due to yet another barrage, making Bithoor an important religious and recreational spot, while Kanpur’s stretch is dominated by sand mining.

Reaching Confluences is Extremely Difficult

In the plains, accessing river confluences — except at major religious sites — is very challenging. Reaching the Kho-Ramganga or Ramganga-Ganga confluence requires great patience and effort; many places are accessible only on foot or by tractor.  As these are not religious places hence none is bothered about the confluence of the rivers. At the Sherkot barrage on the Kho, grass has overgrown the area and water is barely visible. At Latifpur Bila, the path to the confluence is covered in dust and sand. I attempted to reach it twice in the scorching afternoon heat but failed. A farmer from the Saini community, seeing our struggle, kindly offered to take me on his tractor. The ride was perilous across the sandy, pitted terrain reflecting the flooded area in the monsoon. During the journey, he shared the fact that most locals belong to Dalit and extremely backward communities. He was also critical of the government for harming farmers and expressed faith in the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), while observing that the bigger farmers in the area support the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). He also mentioned that annual floods from these rivers regularly destroy crops. This year, with no rain yet, only sugarcane has survived. Even if rain arrives late, farmers stand to gain little. Remarkably, despite both rivers flowing through the fields, local agriculture remains heavily dependent on rainfall. This unambiguously means that farming communities living on the bank of the rivers only suffer the devastation caused by floods and benefit little from the river in “normal time”. During the monsoon, the canals are protected and the original rivers get the fury resulting in the water crossing to the nearby fields and destroying the crop, livestock and human life.

The Crisis Facing the Kho River

The Kho is a relatively small river, yet it has sacrificed much of its own identity to sustain the larger Ganga and Ramganga systems. It supplies water to Dogadda and Kotdwar towns and remains a vital cultural lifeline for local communities. In Uttar Pradesh, the barrage on the Kho irrigates hundreds of villages in Bijnor and Moradabad districts.

Tragically, the very river that gives life to the Ganga and Ramganga — and supports countless farmers — is under severe threat at its source. Both the Uttarakhand and Uttar Pradesh governments must act urgently, working with local communities, municipalities, and panchayats. Immediate steps are needed to:

– Ban all mining on the Kho River

– Stop the unnatural blocking of water in the river and its tributaries

– Take legal action against illegal resorts and hotels along its banks

Saving the Kho River also means protecting the wildlife habitats of Rajaji National Park and the Kalagarh forest division. Kho river’s ecological and environmental importance can be visualised both right from its beginning till it ends its journey. At places like Dogadda the ground water was available very easily. At the time, when a majority of the hill as well as Tarai regions of Uttarakhand suffer from Potable water crisis, towns like Dogadda were actually a haven for all. The water quality here was extraordinary and people never needed refrigerators in the past as water remained cold during the summer and warm in the winter.

It is time to protect and preserve river Kho so that it continues to give us life and energy.

Related:

Understanding Uttarakhand’s ‘pain’ of ‘development’, the bane of religious and wild life tourism

Morbi reflects the ‘revadi culture’ of the Gujarat Model

Periyar the icon of social justice and humanism

The post Environment: The growing crisis on the Kho River appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Two days after the child, who had stepped out on Saturday afternoon to buy a birthday gift, was allegedly abducted, sexually assaulted and murdered, Surjyapur remains suspended between grief and rage. Four arrests have been made, a Special Investigation Team (SIT) has been constituted and further raids are underway. Yet for residents, the biggest question remains unanswered: could the crime have been prevented had authorities acted faster?

Nearly two years after the rape and murder of a trainee doctor inside RG Kar Medical College Hospital triggered one of Bengal’s biggest public movements, another brutal crime against a girl has once again shaken the state. This time, however, the epicentre of anger is not Kolkata but this village in South 24 Parganas, where protests continue to erupt in different corners rather than under one organised banner.

On Tuesday, there was no single protest site. Small groups of residents could be seen outside the victim’s house, near the Surjyapur police outpost, around the block office and at local crossings. The slogans may have become quieter than Sunday’s fury, but the demand has remained unchanged: justice without delay.

Surjyapur Residents Allege Police Delay, Demand Swift Justice

“We are not scared because police are here,” says Sagir Ali, who witnessed the recovery of the child’s body from the pond. “We are scared because if this could happen to an 11-year-old in our village, it can happen to anyone.”

He recalled standing a short distance away as villagers pulled the body from the water.

“I could not go closer. She was just a little girl. I felt shattered. Around 10 to 12 of us were present, but there was no administration at the spot when the body was recovered. We want nothing less than the severest punishment for those responsible.”

Residents repeatedly alleged that they, not the police, took the lead in tracing the suspects.

Juli Seikh, one of the villagers who participated in the search, claimed locals reviewed CCTV footage from nearby shops, identified two suspects, tracked them down and caught them before handing them over to police.

“It was us who checked the CCTV footage and caught them,” he alleged. “If villagers had not acted immediately, would the arrests have happened this quickly?”

Several residents also accused the police of failing to respond promptly after an FIR was lodged at Baruipur Police Station.

There are further allegations that local BJP workers attempted to intervene after villagers handed over the suspects to police, and that pressure was exerted to secure their release on Sunday. The allegation could not be independently verified, and there has been no official response from the BJP.

The sense of insecurity has spread far beyond the victim’s family. Parents say they are no longer allowing young children, especially girls, to step out alone even for routine errands. Conversations in tea stalls, markets and village lanes repeatedly return to the same question: “If an 11-year-old is not safe here, who is?”

The child’s body, stuffed inside a sack, was recovered from a pond in the Surjyapur Haat area on Sunday morning after she had gone missing the previous afternoon. The shocking discovery transformed grief into fury.

Hundreds of residents from Surjyapur and neighbouring villages poured onto the streets, blocking the Baruipur–Joynagar Road and railway tracks for several hours. Tyres were set on fire, a police vehicle was vandalised and protesters demanded immediate arrests and exemplary punishment.

Amid the violence, one man suspected by the crowd of involvement in the crime was allegedly beaten to death by an enraged mob, underscoring the intensity of public anger.

Political Reactions Intensify as Protests Continue in Surjyapur

Facing mounting pressure, police arrested four persons in connection with the case by Monday. A Special Investigation Team has been formed and further raids are continuing.

Inspector General of Police Kankarprasad Barui assured that every person found involved in the crime would face the maximum punishment under the law. The post-mortem report is awaited to determine the exact cause of death and whether sexual assault took place.

Thousands of people again assembled in Surjyapur on Monday, demanding a fair, transparent and time-bound investigation. Although road blockades had ended by Tuesday, the protests had not. Many villagers said they would continue demonstrating until they were convinced the investigation was moving in the right direction.

The incident has also snowballed into a political flashpoint.

CPI(M) leader Md. Lahek Ali visited the victim’s family and joined protests on both Sunday and Monday. Indian Secular Front (ISF) MLA Nawsad Siddique was prevented by security personnel from meeting the bereaved family.

Meanwhile, heavy deployment of police and Central Armed Police Forces outside former Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee’s Kalighat residence on Sunday night triggered a separate political controversy. The Trinamool Congress alleged the security arrangement amounted to “house arrest” and was intended to prevent her from travelling to Surjyapur. On Monday evening, unable to visit the village, she led a candlelight march in Kolkata condemning the killing and demanding justice for the child.

Back in Surjyapur, however, politics appears secondary to the pain etched on every face.

The pond where the body was found has become a grim reminder of a tragedy the village cannot forget. Outside the victim’s home, neighbours continue to arrive quietly, offering condolences to a family struggling to comprehend its loss.

For the people here, the story is no longer only about a child who left home to buy a birthday gift and never returned. It is about whether a village’s cries for justice will continue to be heard after television cameras leave, political leaders move on and public outrage fades.

That question still hangs heavily over Surjyapur.

Antara is a freelance independent journalist based in Kolkata, West Bengal. She reports on climate change, environmental issues, human rights, and crime, with a focus on stories that highlight marginalised voices and public interest. She holds a Bachelor’s (Honours) degree in Philosophy from the University of Calcutta.

Courtesy: The Enewsroom

The post Just 11, Her Last Birthday Gift: Inside Surjyapur’s Fight for Justice appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The present controversy and alleged derogatory remark against Prophet Mohammad

The recent controversy centres on an Instagram podcast reel uploaded around June 19, 2026. In the video, Nazia Elahi Khan is seen in conversation with a host named Divya Singh. Viewers alleged that Khan made derogatory and offensive remarks regarding Prophet Muhammad and his family during this podcast, which subsequently went viral on social media platforms.

The alleged statements sparked widespread outrage within the Muslim community, leading to protests and demands for legal action across multiple states. Community leaders and organisations, including the Raza Academy, argued that the remarks were deeply hurtful to their religious sentiments.

Khan in her defense has also claimed in some reports that the viral videos of her remarks are AI-generated not hers!

Legal action and protests across the country

Following the circulation of the podcast, multiple FIRs and complaints were registered against Khan:

• Bhiwandi, Maharashtra: The first FIR was registered on Monday evening (June 22, 2026) at the Shanti Nagar Police Station. The complaint was filed by a local resident, Adnan Ansari. Ansari stated he saw the reel on June 19 and consulted with community members before approaching the police. The Shanti Nagar police booked Khan for “deliberate acts intended to outrage religious feelings” and under relevant sections of the Information Technology (IT) Act. Senior Inspector Vinayak Gaikwad confirmed the FIR.

Nazia Elahi Khan Par Bhiwandi Shanti Nagar Police Mein FIR Darj For Insulting Prophet In A Podcast, FIR Filed By MIM Team pic.twitter.com/wXvCnsnTSv

— Gallinews India (@gallinews) June 22, 2026

• Mumbai, Maharashtra: A second case, classified as a ‘zero FIR,’ was registered on Tuesday (June 23, 2026) at the JJ Marg Police Station in South Mumbai over the same video content. Police officials noted that this case is likely to be transferred to West Bengal, where Khan currently resides, for further investigation. Representatives of the Raza Academy also submitted a written complaint to the Pydhonie police station seeking action.

Two FIRs have been registered in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region against BJP Minority Morcha leader and social media influencer Nazia Elahi Khan, 41, over alleged derogatory remarks about Prophet Muhammad that reportedly hurt religious sentiments.

The first FIR was registered on… pic.twitter.com/DMVWgu5h37

— The Observer Post (@TheObserverPost) June 23, 2026

• Malegaon, Maharashtra: Reports indicate an FIR has also been filed in Malegaon against Khan, accusing her of hurting religious sentiments.
• Uttar Pradesh & Madhya Pradesh: Protests and demands for action have occurred in various locations, including Bareilly, Muzaffarnagar, Bulandshahr (Uttar Pradesh), and Khargone and Rewa (Madhya Pradesh). In Bareilly, members of the Muslim community submitted a memorandum to the Aonla Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM), demanding strict action against her. AIMIM representatives in Khatauli (Muzaffarnagar) also demanded legal action.
• On June 24, members of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) submitted a memorandum to the Kota District Collector in Rajasthan demanding strict legal action against Nazia Elahi Khan over her alleged remarks. According to the party, the memorandum was submitted on the instructions of AIMIM President Asaduddin Owaisi and Rajasthan State President Jameel Ahmed Khan. The delegation, led by District Vice President Zahid Nizami Mastan and accompanied by other party office-bearers, urged the administration to initiate appropriate legal proceedings over the alleged insult to the Prophet.

Huzoor ﷺ ki shaan mein ki gayi gustakhi ke khilaf aur Nazia Elahi ke viruddh sakht kanooni karwai ki maang ko lekar aaj AIMIM ke qaumi sadar @asadowaisi sahab aur AIMIM Rajasthan ke Pradesh Adhyaksh Jameel Ahmed Khan sahab ke nirdesh par Kota Zila Collector ko gyapan saupa gaya।… pic.twitter.com/e0xenYLslo

— Jameel Khan (@jameelwecan) June 24, 2026

• Hyderabad Police also registered a case against Nazia Elahi Khan over her remark, following a complaint by religious organisation.

Hyderabad Police registered a case against an accused Nazia elahi Khan over alleged derogatory remarks against religious figures, following a complaint by religious scholars and organisations. DCP Charminar Zone assured strict legal action, stressing the need to maintain peace… pic.twitter.com/pt7R6AMP1k

— Nawab Abrar (@nawababrar131) June 25, 2026

The investigations are ongoing, with Mumbai police examining whether the probe should be transferred to West Bengal.

Arrest of Nazia Elahi Khan by Kolkata Police in August 2021 in relation to cheating case

Nazia Elahi Khan was previously arrested by the Girish Park Police in Kolkata on August 26, 2021 in connection with FIR No. 116 of 2020, registered under Sections 419, 420, 506, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, relating to allegations of cheating, impersonation, criminal intimidation, and common intention. The investigation revealed that Khan had allegedly exploited a vulnerable individual involved in a complex matrimonial dispute, extracting Rs 6 lakh under the pretence that her high-level connections could secure a swift and favourable legal outcome. When the promised legal relief failed to materialise and the client demanded the return of his funds, Khan allegedly resorted to intimidation and threats, leading directly to her arrest. She remained in judicial custody until September 18, 2021, when she was granted bail on the ground of her 13-year-old son’s illness.

According to records cited in the case, investigators alleged that despite repeatedly claiming to be an advocate, she was unable during custody to produce documents establishing her legal qualifications or formal educational credentials. The case also relies on a complaint allegedly submitted by Khan to Girish Park Police Station on May 25, 2012, in which she described her qualifications as B.Com., LL.B., a document that investigators have treated as material evidence in the ongoing impersonation proceedings.

Copy of FIR No. 116/2020 registered at Girish Park Police Station

Hate Profile: weaponising Muslim identity, the strategy of provocation

Operating under the self-adopted alias “Nazia Sanatani,” Khan began systematically catering to hard-line right-wing audiences. She recognised a potent dynamic in digital identity politics: when an individual born into a minority group echoes the prejudices of the majority, their statements are often treated as undeniable validation of those prejudices. She became an “insider” willing to confirm the worst fears of the Hindutva base, effectively weaponising her background to provide a veneer of authority to baseless claims.

The remarks made by Nazia Elahi Khan are extremely offensive and derogatory towards Islam and the Prophet Muhammad PBUH.

Has anyone filed any complaints? pic.twitter.com/10I2W86iKO

— S (@Shirink_13) August 4, 2024

Hindus should stay vigilant and should boycott Muslims from government sectors and private sectors: Nazia

On June 8, 2026, Nazia Elahi Khan also courted controversy after calling for the social and economic boycott of Muslims during a press conference. She urged Hindus to refrain from employing Muslims in both government and private sectors for the next two to three years. She reportedly said that “Hindus should stay vigilant and should boycott Muslims from government sectors and private sectors.”

She further alleged that Muslims posed an internal security threat and asserting that “120 crore Hindus” should remain vigilant against various forms of “jihad.” She further questioned the patriotism of Indian Muslims and called for their boycott from employment and public life.

A BJP leader’s call, made during a press conference, to boycott Indian Muslims from government jobs, private employment, and public life is a blatant attack on the Constitution of India and the secular foundations of our republic.

Equally condemnable is the reckless attempt to… pic.twitter.com/67JmdbwBjy

— Dr Syed Naseer Hussain, M P (@NasirHussainINC) June 8, 2026

Her strategy involved constant, high-visibility provocations. She launched what her supporters called the “Hindu Dharam Tour,” traveling to deliver speeches that consistently vilified the Muslim community. In May 2024, in Karda, Maharashtra, she utilised the “Love Jihad” conspiracy theory, falsely claiming that 2,800 Hindu women had been murdered by Muslim men, and asking the crowd, “How can a Muslim man love you when he can so easily give triple talaq and destroy lives?”

In January 2025, in Belagavi, Karnataka, she amplified the “Ghazwa-e-Hind” conspiracy, alleging that local mosques and shrines were covert training grounds designed to entrap Hindu women for an eventual Islamic takeover.

When public speaking engagements waned, Khan demonstrated a willingness to manufacture crises to maintain her digital relevance.

In February 2025, she posted a video claiming Muslim men had intentionally rammed her vehicle in an assassination attempt in Uttar Pradesh. The Kanpur Dehat Police quickly debunked the claim, stating her own driver had fallen asleep at the wheel, and publicly urged citizens not to spread her communal misinformation.

In April 2026, amid the controversy surrounding Lenskart’s alleged dress code on religious symbols, Nazia Elahi Khan entered a Lenskart store in Mumbai along with her supporters and applied tilak to several employees. Videos of the incident showed her confronting the store staff over the alleged policy, asserting that Hindu employees should not be discouraged from displaying their religious identity.

“Sharia lagu karwana hai kya?” :- Nazia Elahi Khan

BJP Minority Morcha leader Nazia Elahi Khan entered a Lenskart outlet in Mumbai’s Andheri area and confronted the store manager, identified as Mohsin Khan, alleging that Hindu employees were being discouraged from wearing… pic.twitter.com/nXQAUmxmZj

— Clips (@Masterstroke_ab) April 23, 2026

Nazia Elahi Khan is not an office-bearer: BJP Minority Morcha

Amid the growing controversy, the BJP Minority Morcha publicly distanced itself from Nazia Elahi Khan. In a statement issued on June 24, the Morcha’s National President, Jamal Siddiqui, clarified that Nazia Elahi Khan is not an office-bearer of the organisation and that no individual by that name holds any official position within the BJP Minority Morcha. He further stated that any claim of representing the Morcha or the BJP in that capacity is “false and misleading.”

The BJP Minority Morcha has said that Nazia Ilahi Khan is not an office-bearer of the organisation. National President of the Morcha, Jamal Siddiqui, stated that no person by that name holds any official position within the body. He further said that any claim of representing the… pic.twitter.com/ymmR8CVqUm

— The Observer Post (@TheObserverPost) June 24, 2026

The CJP archive: documenting a habitual offender

Her speeches have frequently been delivered from platforms hosted by organisations advancing right wing propaganda of communal hatred and have consistently echoed themes such as “Love Jihad”, “Ghazwa-e-Hind”, economic boycott of Muslims, and allegations questioning the patriotism of Indian Muslims.

The sheer volume of FIRs filed against the Nazia Elahi Khan validates the long-standing warnings issued by civil rights monitors. Organisations like Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) have meticulously tracked Khan’s activities for years, maintaining detailed dossiers that classify her as a “habitual hate offender” whose actions are designed to subvert the law for political gain.

The most critical intervention by CJP occurred during the volatile lead-up to the Delhi Assembly elections in early 2025. On January 20, 2025, CJP filed a comprehensive complaint with the Chief Electoral Officer of Delhi regarding a speech Khan delivered at an event organised by the Hindu nationalist group “Chetna” in Rohini. CJP provided exact transcripts to the Election Commission, demonstrating that Khan explicitly violated the Model Code of Conduct and the Representation of the People Act.

CJP takes action against #HateSpeech! A complaint has been filed against BJP leader Nazia Elahi Khan for inciting communal hatred during the #Delhi poll campaign. Read: https://t.co/Y5VsQjYgtB

— Citizens for Justice and Peace (@cjpindia) January 21, 2025

According to CJP, the transcripts of the speech delivered in Delhi revealed Khan telling the Delhi audience that Muslims were inherently violent and primed for criminal activity; “Tell them (Muslims) to get education, they will not! […] But if you tell them to rape, they will do it immediately. Tell them to do love jihad, they will do it immediately. Tell them to throw bombs, bullets, and ammunition! They will throw it immediately.” She further instructed Hindu parents to teach their daughters that “no Abdul is good.” CJP argued that Khan was deliberately deployed to polarise the electorate. The fact that she faced no significant legal consequences for this speech, and was allowed to continue her “Hindu Dharam Tour” for another year and a half, highlights what activists describe as the systemic apathy of law enforcement when dealing with right-wing hate speech.

Legal position governing hate speech

The law governing hate speech is well settled and imposes a clear obligation upon the State and law enforcement authorities to prevent and prosecute such offences. Despite the settled legal position and repeated directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, incidents of inflammatory and communal speeches continue to occur with impunity. Such speeches are deliberately designed to promote enmity and hatred between religious communities, disturb communal harmony, outrage religious sentiments, provoke breaches of public peace, and disseminate false and inflammatory narratives likely to incite discrimination, hostility, or offences against a particular community.

These acts attract, inter alia, Sections 196 (promoting enmity between different groups), 197 (imputations prejudicial to national integration and constitutional allegiance), 299 and 302 (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage and wound religious feelings), 352 (intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace), and 353 (circulation of false information likely to incite offences or create fear and alarm) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The dissemination of such inflammatory speech through public meetings and social media further aggravates its impact by expanding its reach and increasing the likelihood of communal disharmony and public disorder.

Supreme Court directions and statutory duties

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has repeatedly held that law enforcement agencies are under a mandatory obligation to prevent and prosecute incidents of hate speech without waiting for private complaints. In Shaheen Abdulla v. Union of India & Ors. (W.P. (C) No. 940 of 2022), the Court directed all States and Union Territories to register suo moto FIRs immediately whenever any speech attracts offences relating to promotion of communal hatred, irrespective of the religion or identity of the speaker. The Court categorically directed that police authorities must act without waiting for any complaint and must ensure equal enforcement of the law so as to preserve the secular character of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court has further emphasised the preventive responsibilities of the police. By orders dated February 3, 2023, while dealing with proposed communal gatherings in Maharashtra, the Court directed that permissions for public events must be subject to the condition that no hate speech is delivered and clarified that the police are duty-bound to exercise preventive powers, including action under Section 151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure wherever circumstances so require.

Subsequently, by order dated January 17, 2024, the Court directed the District Magistrates and Superintendents of Police in Maharashtra and Chhattisgarh to take all necessary preventive measures, including installation of CCTV cameras and video recording of public events, to ensure identification and prosecution of persons delivering hate speeches or inciting communal violence. These directions reaffirm that police authorities have a continuing constitutional and statutory obligation not merely to prosecute offences after they occur but also to prevent their commission through timely intervention.

In compliance with these judicial directions, the Director General of Police, Maharashtra, issued Circular dated February 2, 2023, directing all police units to strictly implement the Supreme Court’s mandate by taking suo moto action wherever speeches disclose offences relating to communal hatred. Thereafter, by Circular dated April 3, 2023, the Maharashtra Police prescribed comprehensive preventive measures for public meetings and processions, including prior meetings with organisers, imposition of conditions while granting permissions, intelligence gathering, preventive action against anti-social elements, compulsory audio-video recording of events, immediate registration of offences wherever violations occur, and prompt arrests wherever warranted.

These directions make it abundantly clear that failure to initiate timely preventive and prosecutorial action in cases of hate speech would amount to a failure to discharge statutory and constitutional duties entrusted to the police authorities.

Judicial Precedents on Hate Speech

The constitutional position regarding hate speech has been consistently reaffirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. In Firoz Iqbal Khan v. Union of India (W.P. (C) No. 956 of 2020), the Court observed that India’s constitutional democracy is founded upon the peaceful coexistence of diverse religious and cultural communities and held that any attempt to vilify a religious community must be viewed with grave disfavour as it strikes at the core of constitutional values. Earlier, in Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan v. Union of India, (2014) AIR SC 1591, the Supreme Court recognised that hate speech marginalises vulnerable groups, legitimises discrimination, and lays the foundation for exclusion, violence, and even genocide, thereby posing a direct threat to the right to life and dignity guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Further strengthening this jurisprudence, in Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India (W.P. (C) No. 943 of 2021), by order dated April 28, 2023, the Supreme Court extended its earlier directions to all States and Union Territories, mandating registration of suo moto FIRs whenever speeches disclose offences relating to communal hatred, irrespective of the identity or religion of the speaker. The Court reiterated that the police cannot remain passive spectators and must promptly initiate criminal proceedings whenever cognizable offences of hate speech are committed. Collectively, these decisions establish that hate speech is not merely an exercise of free expression but constitutes an abuse of constitutional freedoms where it promotes hostility, discrimination, or violence against protected communities, thereby requiring immediate preventive and penal action by the State.

Moreover, the controversy has expanded beyond social media, with police complaints, memoranda, and demands for legal action being made in several states, including Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar, Maharashtra, Telangana, and Delhi. Amid the growing backlash, the BJP Minority Morcha clarified that Nazia Elahi Khan does not hold any official position in the organisation. With multiple complaints now before the authorities, the matter has shifted from public outrage to the legal process, and the response of law enforcement and the courts will determine its course

Related

CJP files complaint against BJP leader Nazia Elahi Khan over hate speech in Delhi

CJP files 3 MCC violation complaints with CEO Maharashtra against Suresh Chavhanke for hate speech

CJP files 5 hate speech complaints before CEO Maharashtra as violated MCC

The post Nazia Elahi Khan faces multiple FIRs over alleged hate speech appeared first on SabrangIndia.

At the last INDIA bloc meeting at Delhi’s Constitution Club in June, Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge announced that the Opposition parties will send a letter to the CJI “regarding serious questions raised about the Special Intensive Revision (SIR), manipulation of the electoral rolls, and the fairness of elections.” This letter dated June 28, 2026 appears to be the first step in this direction.

While DMK and AAP’s signatures on the letter to CJI signal that the two parties come on board on key issues that affect all parties, a senior Opposition leader ruled out any deeper participation in the short term. AAP quit the mega Opposition group in 2025 after agreeing to contest only during the 2024 Lok Sabha polls. The DMK left the alliance last month after the Congress decided to support the Tamil Nadu chief minister C Joseph Vijay-led Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) government.

Why this letter is significant

The detailed letter to the CJI flags the questionable methods by which the Election Commission (ECI) under the present Chief Election Commissioner (CEC), Gyanesh Kumar, in the name of ‘clean up’ of electoral rolls has undertaken an exercise that has had an opposite and anti-democratic outcome! On the Bihar 2025 SIR, the letter states that, “

“This massive exercise just before the assembly elections, was ill-timed and its faulty implementation a monumental disaster. This, despite the fact that electoral rolls, after they were digitized (2002) were continuously revised and updated by the Commission. But a de-novo revision, never attempted in the fashion adopted by the Commission would ordinarily have required at least a year to do, without being suspect. The documentation process, adopted for the first time, was inherently exclusionary and politically motivated. Verification of voters based on filling forms and production of documents, questioning citizenship, left voters disenfranchised. Lakhs of voters did not possess the required documents. Many of them did not have the capacity to fill forms and forward them as mandated. This was particularly true of those who are poor, uneducated, including Dalits, Adivasis, members of the minority community and migrant workers. There were instances, that the Commission was aware of, where videos circulating on the social media showed booth level officers themselves filling the forms by forging signatures, and in some instances, uploading these forms without the consent of the voters. Even deceased persons were shown to be submitting forms. There was complete lack of transparency and administrative confusion in the implementation of this process exacerbated by the timeframe within which it was required to be done. Instructions of the Commission were changed midway from time to time. There was confusion even amongst election officials.”

Besides the letter states that the “grievance redressal mechanism was inadequate and there was a massive arbitrary deletion of names without proper notice. The alleged objective of the exercise was to remove duplicate voters and the names of the deceased and migrants from the voter’s lists. But the process, as implemented, lacked not just transparency but was implemented in a manner unknown to all processes undertaken in the past. The existing updated electoral rolls were used at the time of the Lok Sabha elections (2024). Even in 2014, the then updated electoral rolls reflected an outcome that none questioned. The whole process of the SIR, according to us, was meant to favour the BJP.”

On Bengal, the letter points to the shocking and deliberate malfunctioning by the ECI. The letter alleges that it appears that the Commission “was concerned only with the outcome of that election since it raised no real issues of manipulation in other states like Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Assam where the SIR was not implemented.”

However, states the communication,

It was apparent that the West Bengal Government was under siege with the presence of 2 lakh 40 thousand CAPF personnel. To put this in context, 3 lakh 50 thousand CAPF personnel were deployed for the entire Lok Sabha election in 2024. There was also a massive deletion of names from the electoral rolls, including those arbitrarily removed, under a never-used-before-category titled ‘logical discrepancies’.

This devious ploy alone left 27 lakh people without the right to vote.

This Hon’ble Court (the Supreme Court) constituted Tribunals to dispose of the appeals where names stood deleted. One of the 19 Tribunals hearing the appeals headed by Justice T.S. Sivagnanam, found that of the 1777 names deleted for which appeals were heard by him, 1717 were wrongly deleted. This means 96% of the names were wrongly deleted. If the same proportion is applied on other pending appeals before the 19 tribunals, it would mean that more than 25 lakh voters were unable to cast their votes due to a process which was inherently flawed.

Most of the deletions were found to be in constituencies where the All India Trinamool Congress (AITC) was dominant. The SIR is an unusual process with which the ordinary voter is unfamiliar. The requirement of filling forms, forwarding them and furnishing of documents in a country where there is massive poverty and illiteracy is essentially exclusionary.

Massive deletions, non-transparent processes, the unprecedented numbers of CAPF personnel deployed, the nomination of two representatives of the Union government of their choice and the Returning Officer chosen by the blatantly biased Commission at the counting centres, with no nominee of the AITC, made for a partisan process and consequently suspect. The en masse transfer of 483 officials including the then Chief Secretary, Home Secretary and others replaced by officers posted by the Commission was an unusual exercise. Such extreme steps were not taken in any election in the past.

Stating that before launching any such exercise like an SIR, the ECI must have previous inquiries and investigations to show “the extent to which the electoral rolls in each state were polluted and why it was necessary to do this exercise for these elections and in such haste.” However, “Even many BLOs in West Bengal were deprived of their right to vote.” While the ECI has been provided enough data and information to show that public confidence in the SIR process has been eroded, the ECI remains deaf to all independent representations, assert the Opposition.

The Letter to the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Justice Surya Kant acknowledges that such a communication by the Opposition to the highest judiciary is unusual, asserts that it is warranted given the unprecedented crisis for institutional democracy and the faith of all Indians in Indian democracy. Hence, the Opposition has demanded through this letter that the “impending SIR in the states of Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat etc. be suspended” and such a process launched if at all when the next Assembly Election is five years away.

Though no details have been provided, the communication makes a brief reference to the fact that “serious questions are also being raised about the process of electronic voting, and in particular about the role of electronic voting machines,” and hence “return to paper ballots” may be the answer.”

Finally urging that “ a transparent electoral process, in which every Indian has full confidence, is essential to sustaining public trust in our democracy,” the letter also points out how law enforcement agencies like the CBI, ED and NIA “ are used not only to target those in opposition. These agencies are also used for the purpose of manipulating the outcome of results in the elections, apart from bringing down elected governments.”

Senior Opposition leader and Trinamool’s Rajya Sabha floor leader Derek O’Brien wrote, “Good going from INDIA. And yes, @AamAadmiParty @arivalayam DMK also signed the joint letter to CJI.”

The letter may be read here:

Related:

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

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

The post 21 Opposition parties to CJI: SIR process is irregular and illegal, must be suspended appeared first on SabrangIndia.