NEW DELHI: The People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR) has condemned the ban on 25 books in Jammu and Kashmir, calling it an attack on freedom of expression and a form of censorship.
In a statement issued on Thursday, PUDR argues that the ban, which targets books deemed to "excite secessionism" and "endanger the sovereignty and integrity of India," is an attempt to erase the region's history and silence dissent. They accuse the government of using the ban to control narratives and suppress any critique of its policies in Kashmir.
The organization alleges that the ban is a deliberate attempt to control narratives about Kashmir and suppress any historical or political analysis that contradicts the government's position. PUDR argues that the ban aims to erase the complex history of Kashmir and the experiences of its people, particularly the impact of state violence and conflict.
The ban, according to PUDR, effectively criminalizes scholarship and intellectual inquiry related to Kashmir, especially those that explore themes of resistance and self-determination. The organization points out that the ban is part of a larger pattern of crackdowns on dissent and criticism in Kashmir since 2019, when the region's special status was revoked.
PUDR's statement highlights the concerns of human rights organizations and scholars about the increasing restrictions on freedom of expression and the suppression of critical voices in Jammu and Kashmir. They argue that the ban not only impacts the writers and publishers but also has a chilling effect on the entire population by limiting their access to information and diverse perspectives.
Full text of the PUDR statement:
On 05 August 2025, by order of the Lieutenant Governor of Jammu and Kashmir, 25 books were declared to be “forfeited” in terms of Section 98 BNSS, the new criminal procedure code. 5 August marks the 6th anniversary of the abrogation of Article 370 of the Constitution and the “book ban” order came at a time when the National Book Trust, India was organizing the Chinar Book Festival in Srinagar.
A ban on books, ideas, narratives, documentation efforts must be opposed, and the courts have the power to strike down such orders on the strength of the Constitutional jurisprudence thus far developed – whether in the context of books or speech. This specific action of the State is patently unlawful, and its significance exceeds the immediate fact of a ban on books. It is not only a continuation of the control that the State exerts on the everyday freedoms of the people of Jammu and Kashmir, but it is also a further effort of the State to criminalize the recognition, discussion, documentation, advocacy and analysis of the well documented history, political movement for the right to self-determination, violence and militarization and its effects in Jammu and Kashmir. It is a further effort of the State to ensure that zones of armed conflict are not subject to any scrutiny by invoking claims of national security and terrorism.
PUDR draws attention to four aspects of this “book ban”
First, on the law invoked. Section 98 BNSS is a reproduction of Section 95 of the earlier CRPC. Its application extends to forfeiture of copies “wherever found in India” as before. Section 98 BNSS can be invoked if the government finds application of any of the substantive provisions that remain the same as earlier with the exception of Section 152 BNS that is most relevant in the present case. Section 152 BNS is set up in the BNS as a new section.
It creates an offence where 1) acts (for example, “words, either spoken or written”), 2) excite/attempt to excite secession or armed rebellion or subversive activities OR encourage feelings of separatist activities OR endangers sovereignty or unity or integrity of India. Section 152 BNS draws from Section 124-A IPC on sedition but in fact goes further and overlaps with Section 2(o) of the UAPA which defines unlawful activities and makes the same an offence under Section 13 UAPA punishable up to seven years whereas Section 152 BNS provides punishment for life. Section 152 BNS has been challenged in the Supreme Court as unconstitutional and arbitrary.
This order provides a fitting example of arbitrary state action. Each claim advanced in the order has no empirical evidence to make any causal link between any one of the 25 books and acts of violence. For example, how does “promotion of alienation” lead to acts of violence? The order claims to be based on “investigations and intelligence”. No details are provided. Further, the supposed “grounds” include vague phrases such as “vilification of security forces”. This order is nothing but an arbitrary act, unlawful and unconstitutional.
Second, the effect of the ban. “Words” have been criminalized. No specific examples (sentences, paragraphs, pages, chapters) have been identified. Effectively then, the books in their entirety – letter and spirit – have now been banned. It is not only the possession, sale, publishing etc that now stands criminalized – any future speech, event, book, article, discussion, human rights report – which draws from or is similar to the words, events, human rights cases, arguments, details in these books – stand criminalized. We are all effectively now put on notice.
Third, this order relates to Jammu and Kashmir, its history, politics, rights of its people and violations. The ban provides a specific challenge as it is in the context of Jammu and Kashmir and its people that have been at the receiving end of a concerted effort of the State to arrest/detain/demolish/censor/intimidate/ban its people, associations, journalists, political activists, human rights defenders.
Since 05 August 2019 (a marker that may serve useful in the instant case to consider a specific time period), 12 organizations, including the Jamaa-e-Islami and Awami Action Committee headed by Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, have been banned under the UAPA (despite operating publicly for decades) and many of their members arrested and prosecuted in NIA Courts in Delhi, Jammu and UAPA Special Courts in Jammu and Kashmir (Jammu and Kashmir has the highest UAPA cases – 947 cases in the period of 2020-2022).
Kashmir Bar Association has been dismantled and its members arrested and prosecuted. Human rights organizations such as the Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons and Jammu Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society have been targeted, members arrested and prosecuted, and their work (human rights reports, use of international law, human rights organizing, civil society initiatives) criminalized. Independent journalists and newspapers have been intimidated, arrested and effectively shut down. Any association with members of banned organizations or non-State armed groups (for example family members) have been criminalized and action has been taken against their employment and property.
Encounters between security forces and non-state armed groups continue to date. Except for the official version, no further information is provided, and it does not appear that the law on encounters as mandated by the Supreme Court is followed in any of the cases. The armed forces operate under the cover of the Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1990 and a court-martial system that is closed to the public. The State operates in Jammu and Kashmir – much as in the instant book ban – on grounds of national security and terrorism.
Fourth, the need for a corrective and comprehensive judicial response. The role of the judiciary in these circumstances is crucial as not only must the judiciary stand up to arbitrary state action it must do so keeping in mind the specific nature of conflict and then apply the laws at its disposal. State policy cannot override the strict application of the law. National security cannot limit judicial scrutiny.
Most importantly, as laws do not operate in isolation, the judiciary must apply the laws keeping in mind the history and reality of Jammu and Kashmir. As one recent example of such an attempt by the judiciary, Justice Kaul in his separate opinion – while agreeing with the majority on the abrogation of Article 370 – refers to a conflict that originates in 1947, occupation of Kashmir by other countries, insurgency from the 1980’s, migrations, entry of the army that created its own grounds realities and “the men, women and children of the State have paid a heavy price”.
Justice Kaul calls for a collective understanding of what has happened in Kashmir and notes “numerous reports documenting these incidents” but no “commonly accepted narrative”. He notes that internationally victims have a right to the truth and “authoritative reporting of the results of the investigation”. He offers one route for this process in the form of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission as seen in post-Apartheid South Africa.
PUDR emphasizes that a judicial response to the instant book ban order – but also all continuing State action in Jammu Kashmir – must be broad and contextual – recognizing history, politics, militarization, minorities and international law – AND strict in that the freedoms of peoples (and their words) must trump arbitrary State policy presented as national security.
Through this book ban, the State seeks to end human rights documentation of violations by the armed forces and demands for accountability (presented as “false narratives”) and contested historical and political narratives on the armed conflict in Jammu and Kashmir (presented as “secession”). This must be resisted by the judiciary. The State must be held accountable.
Paramjeet Singh and Harish Dhawan
(Secretaries)
Have you liked the news article?