The unfinished fight of an ‘anti-national’, Pg8

Umar Khalid, jailed under UAPA since 2020, is accused of instigating violence during Delhi anti-CAA protests.

His bail plea has been rejected repeatedly, with no trial completed even after five years.

Supreme Court is yet to hear his pending bail appeal filed in 2023.

The case exemplifies the criminalisation of dissent in the name of national security.

Draws parallels between Gandhi’s philosophy of inclusion and harmony and the branding of current dissenters as anti-nationals.

Raises concern over the misuse of sedition laws and UAPA, where incarceration becomes punishment in itself.

Article critiques how state narratives project dissenters as enemies, turning public sentiment against those who speak out.

Recounts how Mahatma Gandhi was once vilified for uniting communities, now dissenters like Khalid face similar demonisation.

Denial of bail without trial contradicts natural justice and Article 21 (Right to Life and Liberty).

Detention under UAPA without substantive charges or timely hearing is termed unconstitutional.

Describes personal visit to Umar Khalid’s home, detailing the emotional toll on his family and their continued hope.

His parents and friends are portrayed as symbols of quiet resistance, dignity, and faith in constitutional values.

Highlights the urgent need for judicial reform, especially for UAPA and sedition-like provisions.

Calls for compassionate jurisprudence, reaffirming the right to dissent as essential to democracy.

India must introspect: Does jailing dissenters protect the nation—or threaten the soul of its democracy?

Mains Mock Question:

“In the context of increasing criminalisation of dissent in India, critically examine the balance between national security and civil liberties. Suggest measures to safeguard democratic rights without compromising state security.”