Criticizing Operation Sindhoor and Anti-Democracy Policies: Risks of Arrest and Loss of Citizenship

Professor Mohamubad’s critical post about Operation Sindhoor—a military initiative that has drawn sharp public and political scrutiny—did not result in a debate or dialogue. Instead, it invited the coercive power of the state. He now faces prosecution

Offences under which Ashoka University professor Ali Khan Mohmudabad was booked and arrested under:

·  Section 196, BNS – Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, etc.

·Section 197, BNS – Imputations prejudicial to national integration.

·  Section 152, BNS – Acts endangering the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India.

·  Section 299, BNS – Culpable homicide.

·  Section 353, BNS – Public mischief.

·  Section 79, BNS – Insult to the modesty of a woman

Let's look at the actual post,

 A historian has been jailed not for inciting violence but for advocating against it. He went from long sentences to long sentences. The post is political commentary and criticism. It does not challenge the sovereignty or integrity of India nor support any secessionist activity. 

While some of these offences are aimed at addressing genuine threats to public order or national security, their application to a single social media post raises serious concerns about overcriminalization. The inclusion of Section 299 (culpable homicide) in a case involving no physical harm appears legally tenuous and politically motivated.

Nitasha Kaul, who teaches at the University of Westminster in London, said Sunday that her Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) status has been cancelled for her work on the government’s “anti-minority and anti-democratic policies”

Look at the reason given by the authorities for cancelling her OCI Status:

She was deported back to London, detained for 24 hours last year in the month of February when she was invited to speak upon constitution

Freedom of Expression vs. National Security: A Delicate Excuse

The Indian Constitution guarantees freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a), but with reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2), which includes concerns like national security, public order, and decency. However, these limitations are increasingly used to justify the arrest of dissenters, censorship, and surveillance.

Charges like promoting hatred, undermining national integration, or endangering sovereignty are broad enough to be weaponized against political criticism. Moreover, revoking OCI status as a response to critical journalism or academic critique reflects a punitive use of administrative discretion

A Pattern, Not an Exception

These cases are not isolated. Journalists, students, civil society members, and intellectuals across India face harassment for voicing views contrary to government narratives. Laws like UAPA, sedition (now under review in BNS), and IT rules are frequently employed to stifle political speech.

This points to a growing culture of “manufactured patriotism”, where any dissent is painted as treason, and loyalty to democratic principles is equated with hostility to the state