13.11.2025...Sivaji's..Untouchables News in India.by Team Sivaji.9444917060.follow us in all Social Media.
Crime Without Punishment
The system protects those who commit caste violence while blaming victims for asserting dignity
Two back-to-back incidents, a shoe attack on Dalit CJI B.R. Gavai and the suicide of Dalit ADGP Y. Puran Kumar, expose how caste violence and humiliation persist even at the highest levels of India’s institutions.
Both cases highlight growing impunity under the Hindutva regime, where perpetrators invoking “Sanatan Dharma” face little accountability, while Dalits remain vulnerable despite rank, merit, or office.
The events illustrate how token representation fails to protect Dalits, revealing a systemic, Brahmanical power structure that normalizes caste supremacy and shields upper-caste offenders.
Within the span of days, two incidents have laid bare the entrenched caste realities of contemporary India and the impunity that the Hindutva regime has institutionalised. On October 6, 2025 a 71-year-old lawyer hurled a shoe at Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, a Dalit, inside the Supreme Court, defiantly shouting “Sanatan ka apmaan nahi sahega Hindustan” (India will not tolerate insult to Sanatan Dharma). He was released without charges, his shoe returned, facing no consequences for attacking the country’s highest judicial authority. The very next day, October 7, Additional Director General of Police Y. Puran Kumar, also a Dalit, died by suicide at his Chandigarh residence, leaving an eight-page note describing years of caste humiliation and harassment by senior officers. Despite huge public outrage, nothing has been done to the perpetrators.
These two events, occurring within 24 hours, are not aberrations but revelations of a deeper malaise—the normalisation of caste violence and Brahminical supremacy under a majoritarian Hindutva order that has erased accountability for crimes committed in the name of Sanatan Dharma or Hindu honour. One incident reflects physical assault on a Dalit constitutional authority without reprisal; the other, psychological persecution that drove a senior officer to death. Together, they expose an ecosystem where Dalits—irrespective of office, achievement, or rank—remain vulnerable to humiliation and violence sanctioned by ideological impunity.
These are not isolated tragedies but logical outcomes of the Hindutva project that the ruling regime has consolidated over the past decade—an order that weaponises religion to defend caste and punishes dignity itself.
The Shoe That Revealed Everything
The attack on Chief Justice B.R. Gavai was unprecedented in audacity and deeply revealing in consequence. In a packed Supreme Court room, a lawyer hurled his shoe at the bench headed by CJI Gavai, defiantly shouting a slogan sourced from the Hindutva playbook. He later claimed he was enraged by the CJI’s quip—“ask the deity itself to do something”—while dismissing a frivolous plea to restore a Vishnu idol at Khajuraho. Such verbal retorts by judges, right or wrong, are not uncommon. However, the Hindutva networks seized on the remark as an “insult to Sanatan Dharma”, manufacturing the outrage that fuelled the assault.
What followed laid bare the regime’s moral collapse. The assailant was released within hours. He boasted to the press, “I have no regrets…I was hurt.” The Prime Minister’s bland condemnation avoided any commitment to legal action. The Bar remained silent; the media soon moved on. By contrast, when a Mumbai lawyer threw a shoe at CJI A.S. Anand in 1999, aggrieved by the verdict in his property matter, he was convicted of contempt and sentenced to four months imprisonment and a fine.
Kishore’s act was graver because it was ideological. His slogan invoked Sanatan Dharma—a euphemism for Brahminism that sanctifies caste hierarchy—asserting that religious sentiment trumps constitutional authority. It claimed the right to assault a Dalit Chief Justice in defence of “Hindu honour,” confident that society would understand, perhaps even celebrate, the act.
This confidence of impunity is no accident. It is the product of a decade-long Hindutva campaign that has normalised upper-caste violence under the banner of faith. When cow vigilantes lynch Muslims, interfaith couples are attacked, or homes are bulldozed without due process, the same message resounds: violence in the name of Sanatan Dharma enjoys state protection.
The online abuse of CJI Gavai was overtly casteist, mocking his intelligence and legitimacy. The hate spewed against him as a Dalit on social media is criminal, but the entire state machinery has been silent. The outrage over “insult to Sanatan” was merely a polite mask for fury at a Dalit occupying the highest judicial office and dismissing an upper-caste petitioner. In the Brahminical logic encoded in Sanatan Dharma, a Dalit exercising authority represents an inversion of the natural order that must be violently corrected. Kishore’s attack—and the regime’s indulgence—thus revealed everything about Hindutva’s compact with caste: that in the new India, religious offence is punishable, but caste violence is not.
The Suicide Note That Indicts a System
On October 7, 2025, Additional Director General of Police Y. Puran Kumar, a 2001-batch Dalit IPS officer from Andhra Pradesh serving in Haryana, shot himself at his Chandigarh residence. In his suicide note, he named several IPS and IAS officers, accusing them of sustained mental harassment, humiliation, and caste-based discrimination.
Kumar detailed how he was sidelined despite seniority, denied postings he deserved, and targeted through fabricated charges. His note spoke of a systematic campaign of humiliation, including attempts to implicate him in a fake bribery case. His wife, Amneet Kumar, an IAS officer, filed a complaint holding the named officials responsible for his death and demanding their suspension and arrest. What has emerged from Kumar’s note reveals the pervasive caste bias that Dalit officers continue to face in “meritocratic” institutions. Kumar wrote of years of “mental harassment and humiliation”, of being denied recognition and opportunities his upper-caste peers enjoyed. His decision to end his life after naming his tormentors was both an act of despair and an indictment—a demand that the system confront its casteist rot.
Kumar’s death demolishes the myth that rank or merit protects Dalits from caste oppression. Here was an officer one step below the state’s top cop, yet, even his uniform and authority could not shield him from institutionalised caste prejudice. If an ADGP could be hounded to suicide, what hope remains for Dalit constables or sub-inspectors, not to speak of ordinary Dalits?
The tragedy underscores that caste hierarchy persists beneath the veneer of equality. Despite constitutional safeguards and diversity mandates, India’s police forces remain dominated by upper castes, reproducing social hierarchies within the bureaucracy. Dalit officers are routinely marginalised, denied postings, discredited for success, and reminded that—whatever their rank—their caste defines their place. Kumar’s final note stands as a searing testament: in caste India, even power wears the badge of humiliation.
The Hindutva Regime’s Enabling of Caste Impunity
The current regime has strategically elevated a few Dalits such as Presidents Kovind and Murmu and select ministers—to project inclusiveness. This token representation offers aspirational symbols, deflects charges of casteism, and lets the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) claim empowerment while tightening caste hierarchies.
The experiences of CJI Gavai and ADGP Kumar expose the emptiness of this gesture. Symbolic elevation without structural reform offers no protection. When Dalits in high office act independently—as CJI Gavai did when dismissing the Khajuraho petition—they face violence that goes unpunished. When they rise by merit—as Kumar did—they face relentless humiliation the system refuses to address. Visibility masks vulnerability; caste remains the invisible law of power. No wonder, atrocities against Dalits in NCRB reports show a sudden spurt: the average yearly number of cognizable offences against Dalits shooting up from 32,494 to 45,622 during the nine years preceding and succeeding the BJP’s takeover of power at the Centre in 2014.
Upper castes still resist Dalit authority, respond to assertion with violence, and rely on a state apparatus that ensures impunity.
This impunity is not incidental but ideological, rooted in the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s (RSS’s) worldview. From Golwalkar onward, the RSS has glorified varna dharma as a divinely ordained social order. Caste hierarchy, rebranded as cultural harmony, is central to its conception of Hindu civilisation. Once this ideology captured state power, caste violence became governance by other means—seen in the dilution of SC/ST protections, rise in atrocities, and appointment of upper-caste loyalists across institutions.
The shoe thrown at CJI Gavai and Kumar’s suicide expose the same reality: the regime showcases Dalits for legitimacy while preserving Brahminical dominance through systemic impunity.
Both incidents expose a clear pattern: impunity for perpetrators, vulnerability for Dalits—no matter their rank. Kishore assaults the Chief Justice and walks free; officers named in ADGP Kumar’s suicide note continue in service despite his wife’s complaint. FIRs and inquiries follow, but accountability never arrives.
This impunity is structural, not accidental. With investigative agencies subservient to the regime, judges intimidated, media complicit, and civil society silenced, the system protects those who commit caste violence while blaming victims for asserting dignity. It is an order designed to shield perpetrators and punish resistance.
The episodes of Gavai and Kumar lay bare caste as the enduring grammar of Indian society, unbroken by constitutional promises. From the files hurled at Ambedkar in Baroda to the shoe thrown at CJI Gavai in the Supreme Court, from the historical humiliation of Dalit officials to Kumar’s final note, the continuity is chilling.
Neither constitutional office nor professional merit offers real protection. Upper castes still resist Dalit authority, respond to assertion with violence, and rely on a state apparatus that ensures impunity. Formal equality exists only on paper; Brahminical hierarchy has been reinstalled beneath the veneer of democracy under the current regime.
The lesson for Dalits is stark: individual success within a casteist order cannot secure collective liberation. A few elevated figures—CJI Gavai or ADGP Kumar—do not signal emancipation; they mask continuing subjugation. Kumar’s suicide exposes how token inclusion becomes another form of violence when institutions remain Brahminical at the core.
A lawyer assaults the Chief Justice and walks free; officers accused of harassing a Dalit ADGP remain in office. This is not democracy but rule by impunity. The regime has crippled institutional independence—investigative agencies serve power, courts face intimidation, and media functions as propaganda. When even the highest offices offer no protection, ordinary Dalits are left entirely exposed.
Accountability must begin with prosecuting Kishore and the officers named in Kumar’s note. Justice demands independent institutions and sustained political struggle, not momentary outrage. Dalits must reject the BJP’s tokenism and pursue Ambedkar’s unfinished task—the annihilation of caste, not its reform. The assaults on Gavai and Kumar show that no Dalit is safe while impunity reigns; only solidarity across caste, religion, and region can challenge this authoritarian caste order.
Two Incidents, One System
The shoe hurled at CJI Gavai and Kumar’s suicide spring from the same source: a regime that sanctifies caste hierarchy under the banner of Hindu nationalism. Kishore’s audacity, Kumar’s despair, and the state’s silence expose a society where Brahminical ideology thrives behind democratic facades.
These are not isolated tragedies but symptoms of a designed order—one that rewards perpetrators and punishes assertion. Resistance must mean more than mourning; it must mean naming the system, organising against it, and refusing the normalisation of caste violence.
Until caste hierarchy is dismantled, until Sanatan Dharma’s caste core is unmasked, until impunity is replaced with justice, the shoe will be thrown again, and another suicide note will appear. The task before us is to ensure it need not.
Anand Teltumbde
(Views expressed are personal)
Anand Teltumbde is an Indian scholar, writer and human rights activist.
This story appeared in print as Crime Without Punishment in Outlook’s November 21 issue Solitude Of Power, in which we trace Bihar’s enduring political grammar, where caste equations remain constant, alliances shift like sand, and one man’s survival instinct continues to shape the state’s destiny.
Courtesy : Outlook India
Dhanapur: A broken electricity pole in a Dalit settlement has been lying broken for two years; villagers are worried; the department has given assurances.
An electricity pole has been lying broken for the past two years in the Ahikoura Dalit settlement in the Dhanapur area of Chandauli district. The pole could collapse at any time, raising the possibility of a major accident. Villagers are angry with the electricity department.
The broken pole is located in a street in the settlement, frequented by young children, women, and the elderly. Villagers say this road is dangerous 24 hours a day. A serious accident could occur at any time if the pole collapses, for which the electricity department will be held responsible.
Villagers stated that they have contacted electricity department officials and employees several times to resolve this issue. Villager Sushil reported that each time they were only given assurances, but even after two years, no solution has been found to the broken pole.
While the BJP government makes lofty claims of development, no leader or official has taken any initiative to replace the broken electricity pole in the Dalit settlement for two years. The villagers even informed a local BJP leader about the issue, but he ignored it, leaving them disappointed.
Villagers Sushil Kumar, Ravi Kumar, Chandu Bauddh, Dhananjay, Raju, Writer, Suraj, Shankar, Dukhau, Ramharkh BDC, Shivpujan, Rambhavan Ram, Santosh, Chhotelal, Deepak Ram, Basanti, and Nirmala, among others, have drawn the attention of the District Magistrate, Chandauli, demanding an immediate solution.
SDO of the Electricity Department, Sudhir Kumar, stated that the problem will be resolved soon and the pole replaced.
Mukesh Kumar Maurya
Courtesy: Hindi News
No road to Dalit settlement in Koraon: Villagers of Babhanpatti have to take a 2-kilometer detour to reach the main road
In Babhanpatti village in the Koraon area of Prayagraj (Allahabad), residents of the Dalit settlement have to take an additional 2-kilometer detour to reach the main road. This problem persists due to the lack of a culvert, preventing the unpaved road from connecting to the main black road.
According to villagers, a dirt road was constructed in 2010. This road is primarily used by residents of the Harijan settlement. Due to the lack of a culvert, they have to travel a longer route to reach the Ghade Ghadwa settlement.
If a culvert is constructed on this road, the two roads will be connected. This will reduce the distance to the main road to approximately 800 meters, saving villagers time and labor.
Several villagers, including Raghav Prasad Harijan, Sheshmani Dubey, Vikas Sunil Adivasi, and Chandrama Harijan, have drawn the attention of the government and concerned authorities to this problem.
Shamim Ghani Shaikh
Courtesy: Hindi News
Get breaking news alerts, subscribe now
HC issues notice to Punjab govt, Centre over removal of nearly 7,000 SC/ST beneficiaries from PM Awaas Yojana
The PIL, filed by a woman labourer from Muktsar, said thousands were struck off the permanent waiting list months before last year’s Assembly bypoll in Punjab’s Gidderbaha.
3 min 
The bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Vikram Berry, hearing the matter, took on record a key central document outlining the rules for the housing scheme (File)The Punjab and Haryana High Court Tuesday issued notice to the Punjab Government and central authorities directing to explain why thousands of Scheduled Caste (SC) and Scheduled Tribe (ST) residents were dropped from the list of beneficiaries for the Pradhan Mantri Awaas Yojana-Gramin (PMAY-G) without any warning or inspection.
The bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Vikram Berry, hearing the matter, took on record a key central document outlining the rules for the housing scheme and flagged procedural lapses in the state’s handling.
Struck off waiting list ahead of Gidderbaha bypoll
The Public Interest Litigation (PIL) by Sukhjeet Kaur, 48, a daily wage labourer from Chak Giljwala village in Muktsar district, spotlights what she describes as “blatant misuse of power” driven by local electoral politics. Kaur, who lives in a flimsy makeshift home with her husband Raj Singh, alleged that she and scores of others like her – all initially cleared for homes under the Centre’s PMAY-G – were struck off the permanent waiting list just months before last year’s bypoll in the Gidderbaha Assembly segment.
Kaur’s plea, argued by her counsel Nikhil Ghai, paints a picture of quiet desperation among Punjab’s rural underclass. In 2019, when the state prepared its permanent voter list, often used as a base for welfare schemes, Kaur and her neighbours were verified as eligible for PMAY-G, the flagship rural housing initiative launched by the Centre in 2015 to provide pucca homes to the poorest.
They even received Awaas Plus IDs, unique identifiers that locked their spot on the permanent waiting list (PWL), promising a dignified roof over their heads. But in July 2024, a sudden “verification drive” by the Punjab government upended everything. Letters dated July 9, 2024, and February 6, 2025, both annexed to the petition, informed Kaur that her name had been removed from the list after a re-check.
‘Politically motivated exercise’
Advocate Ghai urged the court to quash what he said was an “arbitrary and politically motivated exercise” undertaken by the state of Punjab, through which 6,952 eligible SC/ST beneficiaries, including the petitioner, were excluded from the PWL under the PMAY-G scheme. He submitted that these beneficiaries had already been verified, but were removed without any notic.
Why India’s judiciary needs diversity for democratic justice
Judges from less represented social backgrounds reshape judicial reasoning based on their experience and perspective, broadening the meaning of justice.
Since 2018, less than 23% of the judges appointed to India’s High Courts have been members of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Other Backward Classes or minority communities.
In response to a question in Rajya Sabha in March, Minister of State for Law and Justice Arjun Ram Meghwal said that the government has maintained details of the social background of judges since 2018: of the 715 high court judges appointed, 22 were from the Scheduled Castes, 16 from Scheduled Tribes, 89 belong to OBC category and 37 belong to Minorities.
Before you scroll further…
Get the best of Scroll directly in your inbox for free.
That the change was effected under BR Gavai, only the second Dalit Chief Justice of India in the history of the Supreme Court, is significant.
Like Gavai, judges from marginalised social backgrounds, with their varying experience and perspectives, have brought changes to how the Indian judiciary adjudicates on matters.
But the heart of the judiciary is untouched. Parliament, public services and universities have – however reluctantly and unevenly – opened their doors to marginalised groups, but the higher judiciary has remained insular, exclusive and opaque. The judiciary prides itself as the guardian of democracy, but this rings hollow given its own composition.
The mask of merit
The higher judiciary’s closed circle is a direct outcome of the collegium system: sitting judges appoint the next crop, nominating judges from among senior advocates and judges of lower courts, creating a self-perpetuating upper-caste elite circle. Appeals for reform have been dismissed for decades under the pretext of “independence of the judiciary”.
Parliament passed the National Judicial Appointments Commission Bill, 2014, in August that year, with the overwhelming support of the Opposition. The bill received presidential assent. But the Supreme Court struck it down in 2015 saying that the involvement of a Union law minister as direct member of the commission and the veto powers to a non-judicial member would compromise judicial independence.
The higher judiciary’s closed-door composition has been a concern for long. Since the 1980s, voices like American political scientist George H Gadbois and Andhra Pradesh judge BSA Swamy had sought reservations in the judiciary, pointing out the near-total absence of Dalits and Adivasis on the bench.
“If I am asked by anyone to name two things, which have destroyed this country...those would be – reservation and corruption”, Pardiwala had said. The remarks were expunged after 58 Rajya Sabha members moved an impeachment motion against Pardiwala.
Yet, as sociologists like Satish Deshpande have shown, merit in India is a privilege marked by caste more than ability or talent. Access to elite schools, English-medium education, coaching classes and networks of influence – all disproportionately cornered by upper castes – are passed off as talent.
Yale professor Daniel Markovits’s book, The Meritocracy Trap, describes this as a system where the privileged claim to succeed by talent while quietly rigging the rules in their favour, thereby undermining the very foundation of democracy itself.
What diverse judges bring to the table
Judges from diverse social backgrounds reshape judicial reasoning through their experiences, perspectives and knowledge, broadening the meaning of justice. Women judges, with their experience of gendered discrimination, can change how cases are adjudicated.
For example, Justice BV Nagarathna, as part of a Supreme Court bench ruling in February, set aside the dismissal of two women judicial officers and called for workplace gender sensitivity. Nagarathna is likely to become the first woman chief justice of India in 2027.
Justice Leila Seth, the first woman judge of the Delhi High Court and the first woman chief justice of a state high court – Himachal Pradesh – was instrumental in seeking equal inheritance rights for daughters under Hindu family law. Seth was a member of the 15th law commission of India, which had proposed reforms to the Seth the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
This contrast is evident in the unfortunate comparison that can be drawn from the way the judiciary dealt with the 2020 Hathras rape case: the 19-year-old Dalit woman, in her dying declaration, named the upper-caste rapists, but in 2023, the Special SC/ST court dismissed the gangrape charges and acquitted three of the four accused, giving greater weight to forensic evidence which was collected 11 days after woman’s testimony.
In the case of the 2012 Delhi gangrape, the woman’s dying declaration was accepted as crucial evidence. Commentators pointed out that both were instances of a violent, gendered crime, but one woman was not granted justice.
Necessity of representation
A constitutional roadmap for reservation in judicial appointments can transform India’s higher judiciary – for the better. This could mean extending the logic of Article 16 of the Constitution, which provides for the fundamental right to equal opportunity in public employment and reservations, to Articles 124-147 and 217, which pertain to judicial appointments.
It can be done by introducing a constitutional amendment which enjoins social background as a constitutional principle in judicial appointments, ensuring representation of marginalised communities in the Supreme Court and High Courts.
This could be operationalised through a new judicial diversity act, which will require selection bodies to consider social representation as one of the criteria for judicial appointment, with representation embedded as a principle within the idea of the “independence” of the judiciary.
Such an approach changes the understanding of the judiciary’s “independence”: rather than meaning isolation from society, it will foster legitimacy built on public trust – something that a homogenous bench cannot inspire in a country as diverse as India.
Diversity, through constitutionally guaranteed representation, can become part of the judiciary’s own selection values rather than external political pressure, strengthening the institution’s democratic values.
Another important step is to make caste and gender data on judges publicly available. The law ministry and courts could be legally obligated to publish caste and gender data annually to promote transparency and accountability.
Citizens cannot have confidence in an institution that does not represent them. Ambedkar has said, “Political democracy cannot last unless there lies at the base of it – social democracy.” Until the bench reflects the diversity of India, justice for all will be an illusion guarded by the privileged few.
Jay Bharat Choudhari is a PhD researcher at the centre of African Studies at the University of Edinburgh in UK and is the founder of non-profit Dhyeya Educational Foundation. His research interests include Caste, Race, Meritocracy, and Higher Education.
- This is the foundation of Buddhist thought:
- The truth of suffering (dukkha): Life involves suffering.
- The truth of the cause of suffering: Suffering arises from craving and attachment.
- The truth of the end of suffering: Suffering can cease.
- The truth of the path to the end of suffering: The Noble Eightfold Path leads to the end of suffering.
- The truth of suffering (dukkha): Life involves suffering.
- This is the practical guide to ending suffering:
- Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration.
- Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration.
- The Five Precepts:These are a set of guidelines for ethical conduct:
- Abstain from killing living beings.
- Abstain from stealing.
- Abstain from sexual misconduct.
- Abstain from lying.
- Abstain from intoxicants.
- Abstain from killing living beings.
- Karma and rebirth:Actions have consequences, and the cycle of death and rebirth continues based on one's karma until enlightenment is achieved.
- Impermanence (Anicca):Nothing in life remains static; everything is in a constant state of change.
- Interconnectedness (Pratฤซtyasamutpฤda):All phenomena are interdependent and arise from causes and conditions.
- Enlightenment and Nirvana:The ultimate goal is to achieve enlightenment and freedom from the cycle of suffering and rebirth.
- Compassion (Karuna):A central value that involves wishing for the happiness of all beings and actively working to alleviate their suffering.
- The Middle Way:The Buddha taught a path of moderation, avoiding extremes of self-indulgence and self-mortification.
Comments
Post a Comment