Indian authorities in Kashmir ban books by eminent writers and scholars
The ban threatens people with prison time for selling or owning works by authors such as Booker Prize-winning novelist and activist Arundhati Roy, constitutional expert A.G. Noorani, and noted academicians and historians like Sumantra Bose, Christopher Snedden and Victoria Schofield.
Booksellers and owners could face prison
The order was issued on Tuesday by the region's Home Department, which is under the direct control of Lt. Gov. Manoj Sinha, New Delhi's top administrator in Kashmir.
Sinha wields substantial power in the region as the national government's representative, while elected officials run a largely powerless government that came to power last year after the first local election since India stripped the disputed region of its special status in 2019.
The order declared the 25 books 'forfeit' under India's new criminal code of 2023, effectively banning the works from circulation, possession and access within the Himalayan region. Various elements of the code threaten prison terms of three years, seven years or even life for offenses related to forfeit media, although no one has yet been jailed under them.
'The identified 25 books have been found to excite secessionism and endangering sovereignty and integrity of India,' the Home Department said in its notice. It said such books played 'a critical role in misguiding the youth, glorifying terrorism and inciting violence against Indian State.'
The action was taken following 'investigations and credible intelligence' about 'systemic dissemination of false narratives and secessionist literature' that was 'often disguised as historical or political commentary,' it said.
India is cracking down on dissent in Kashmir
Nuclear-armed rivals India and Pakistan each administer part of Kashmir, but both claim the territory in its entirety.
Militants in the Indian-controlled portion of Kashmir have been fighting New Delhi's rule since 1989. Many Muslim Kashmiris support the rebels' goal of uniting the territory, either under Pakistani rule or as an independent country.
India insists the Kashmir militancy is Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. Pakistan denies the charge, and many Kashmiris consider it a legitimate freedom struggle. Tens of thousands of civilians, rebels and government forces have been killed in the conflict.
Since 2019, authorities have increasingly criminalized dissent and shown no tolerance for any narrative that questions India's sovereignty over Kashmir.
In February, police raided bookstores and seized hundreds of books linked to a major Islamic organization in the region.
In 2011, police filed charges against Kashmir education officials over a textbook for first graders that illustrated the word 'tyrant' with a sketch resembling a police official. A year earlier to that, police arrested a college lecturer on charges he gave his students an English exam filled with questions attacking a crackdown on demonstrations challenging Indian rule in the region.
In some cases, the accused were freed after police questioning but most of these cases have lingered on in India's notoriously slow judicial system.
Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, a key resistance leader in Kashmir, condemned the book ban.
'Banning books by scholars and reputed historians will not erase historical facts and the repertoire of lived memories of people of Kashmir,' Mirwaiz said in a statement. He questioned authorities for organizing an ongoing book festival to showcase its literary commitment but on ground banning some books.
'It only exposes the insecurities and limited understanding of those behind such authoritarian actions, and the contradiction in proudly hosting the ongoing Book Festival.'
India rarely bans books, but has tightened grip on media
Banning books is not common in India, but authorities under Prime Minister Narendra Modi have increasingly raided independent media houses, jailed journalists and sought to re-write history in school and university textbooks to promote the Hindu nationalist vision of his ruling Bharatiya Janata Party.
Meanwhile, curriculums related to Muslim Mughal rulers who ruled much of India between sixteenth and nineteenth centuries have been altered or removed. Last year, An Indian court ended decades-old ban on Salman Rushdie's 'The Satanic Verses' owing to absence of any official order that had banned the book in 1988.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Major Airline Announces Temporary Stop on Direct Flights From Delhi to Washington DC
Passengers looking to fly directly from Delhi, India to the U.S. Capitol will want to book a flight with an airline aside from Air India. Air India announced Aug. 11, 2025 that it would be suspending direct flights to Washington DC. Airplane Upgrade and Airspace Closure to Blame The airline "primarily" blamed an upgrade program on its fleet of 26 Boeing 787-8 jets that began in July for the delay. But Air India also pointed to the fact that Pakistan's airspace has been continually closed to Indian flights. The suspension is set to begin Sept. 1, 2025, and will likely end at the earliest by the end of 2026, according to the company's official announcement. Air India customers who have already booked direct flights to DC for after the suspension date will be offered alternative travel arrangements, which could include booking other flights or full refunds. The company's fleet of 787-8s is undergoing an upgrade program to improve the "customer experience," and "necessitates a prolonged unavailability of multiple aircraft at any given time until at least end of 2026." The Pakistan airspace closure to Indian flights is a little more complicated. More Details on the Airspace Closure The two countries have been at odds for decades, but the latest conflict began on April 22, 2025 with a terrorist attack in Pahalgam, India that killed 26. India the next day in response suspended a treaty it had signed with Pakistan and shutdown a main land border crossing between the two countries, according to The Hindu. Pakistan April 24 then closed its airspace to Indian flights, and India closed its airspace to Pakistani flights on April 30. Both countries have extended the airspace closures since then. Air India is expected to face around $600 million in extra costs because of the airspace closure, and has asked the Indian government for financial assistance while the conflict continues, according to The Independent. Related: Alaska Airlines Cuts 4 Routes in Major Shakeup Major Airline Announces Temporary Stop on Direct Flights From Delhi to Washington DC first appeared on Men's Journal on Aug 11, 2025
Associated Press
6 hours ago
- Associated Press
Judge strikes down key parts of Florida law that led to removal of books from school libraries
ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — A federal judge has struck down key parts of a Florida law that helped parents get books they found objectionable removed from public school libraries and classrooms. It is a victory for publishers and authors who had sued after their books were removed. U.S. District Judge Carlos Mendoza in Orlando said in Wednesday's ruling that the statute's prohibition on material that described sexual conduct was overbroad. Mendoza, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, also said that the state's interpretation of the 2023 law was unconstitutional. Among the books that had been removed from central Florida schools were classics like Margaret Atwood's 'The Handmaid's Tale,' Richard Wright's 'Native Son' and Kurt Vonnegut's 'Slaughterhouse-Five.' 'Historically, librarians curate their collections based on their sound discretion not based on decrees from on high,' the judge said. 'There is also evidence that the statute has swept up more non-obscene books than just the ones referenced here.' After the Republican-controlled Florida Legislature passed the law, school officials worried that any sexual content was questionable, a belief that was enforced by new state training that urged librarians to err on the side of caution. Last year, Florida led the nation with 4,500 removals of school books. Under the judge's ruling, schools should revert back to a U.S. Supreme Court precedent in which the test is whether an average person would find the work prurient as a whole; whether it depicts sexual content in an offensive way; and whether the work lacks literary, artistic, political or scientific value. The lawsuit was brought by some of the nation's largest book publishers and some of the authors whose books had been removed from central Florida school libraries, as well as the parents of schoolchildren who tried to access books that were removed. The author plaintiffs included Angie Thomas, author of 'The Hate U Give"; Jodi Picoult, author of 'My Sister's Keeper"; John Green, author of 'The Fault in Our Stars"; and Julia Alvarez, author of 'How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents.' The publisher plaintiffs included Penguin Random House, Hachette Book Group, HarperCollins Publishers, Macmillan Publishing and Simon and Schuster.
Forbes
7 hours ago
- Forbes
Judge Strikes Down Florida Book Ban Law
In 2023, Florida's legislators passed HB 1069, a bill that allowed for the removal from schools of any book that 'depicts or describes sexual conduct," requiring the book to be pulled from the school once an objection was filed by any county resident. It also protected the right to read excerpts from challenged works at board meetings. The law is vague and broad and included no room for considering the literary merit of the work, and so the result was a wave of book bans across the state. One district banned the Maurice Sendak classic 'In The Night Kitchen' because one illustration includes a boys bare butt. The Orange County Sentinel reported on an astonishing list of 673 books that Orange County Schools pulled. The list includes popular authors like John Green and Stephen King as well as classics such as the plays of Aristophenes and John Milton's epic Paradise Lost. Six publishers, the Author's Guild, five suthors, two students, and two parents filed suit against the law in 2024, and a decision was issued by Judge Carlos Mendoza of the U.S. Middle District Court of Florida on August 13. Mendoza landed heavily in favor of the plaintiffs, finding several problems with the law. One is that the law is so very broad and severe that it gave extraordinary power to any resident of the school district. As Mendoza notes, "The vagueness of the provisions only serves to expand their sweep." What counts as a depiction of sexual conduct, exactly? By allowing 'I'll know it when I see it' to be the sole standard for a book's banworthy status, Mendoza noted, the law 'would unconstitutionally empower those who would limit speech to arbitrarily enforce the law.' In other words, a school district could be at the mercy of a single extreme individual. Just a few months after HB 1069 was passed, the Tampa Bay Times reported that over half of the book challenges filed in Florida came from just two individuals. One man in Clay County challenged hundreds of books. Mendoza notes that obscene materials are already illegal for school libraries. Defendants also attempted to argue that removal of books was a sort of protected government speech. But Mendoza points out that the case is not talking about a librarian curating a collection as an agent of the government, but about the application of a blanket rule constructed in such a way that the bans are parental speech, not government. [T]he statute here mandates the removal of books that contain even a single reference to the prohibited subject matter, regardless of the holistic value of the book individually or as part of a larger collection. Moreover, many removals at issue here are the objecting parents' speech, not the government's. Parents certainly have the right to object to 'direct the upbringing and education of children,' but the government cannot 'repackage their speech and pass it off as its own.' Mendoza points to the Miller Test, guidelines for obscenity cases that offer three prongs. First, would the work as whole be seen as prurient by an ordinary person using community standards. Second, does the work describe the sexual material in an offensive way. Third, does the work lack any scientific, literary, artistic, or political merit. In the Miller Test, all three prongs must be met to qualify a work as obscene. Mendoza finds the Florida law lacking, especially when it comes to considering the work as a whole. On question of obscenity, Mendoza finds the law failing: Plaintiffs have established multiple unconstitutional applications of thestatutory provisions at issue. The following books, among others, have beenremoved: The Color Purple, Half of a Yellow Sun, Cloud Atlas, The Splendid andthe Vile, I am Not Your Perfect Mexican Daughter, The Freedom Writers Diary:How a Teacher and 150 Teens Used Writing to Change Themselves and the World Around Them, On the Road, Nineteen Minutes, Paper Towns, Looking for Alaska, How the García Girls Lost Their Accents, The Kite Runner, Slaughterhouse-Five, Shout, Last Night at the Telegraph Club, The Handmaid's Tale, Native Son, Kaffir Boy: The True Story of a Black Youth's Coming of Age in Apartheid South Africa, Water for Elephants, Beloved, Song of Solomon, The Bluest Eye, and Homegoing. None of these books are obscene. It's not clear what comes next. The administration of Governor Ron DeSantis has not yet commented on the ruling, but an appeal seems likely. In the meantime, do school districts need to return books that have been fremoved under this law (or, in some cases, in anticipation of threats under this law)?
