Indian Authorities Ban 25 Books in Kashmir Over “Secessionist” Content

Tone & Political Bias: Moderately Right-Leaning

Why: The government's reasoning emphasizes national security and sovereignty, while criticisms of the ban are briefly noted without much elaboration or support.

What’s Happening

Indian authorities in the Jammu and Kashmir region have banned 25 books, accusing them of promoting false narratives, glorifying terrorism, and inciting secessionism. The move comes amid ongoing restrictions on media and free expression in the region.

The order was issued by the Home Department of Jammu and Kashmir, which operates under Lt. Gov. Manoj Sinha, New Delhi’s appointed administrator.

Who Is Affected

Writers and intellectuals: The banned list includes notable names such as Booker Prize-winning author Arundhati Roy, legal scholar A.G. Noorani, and historians Sumantra Bose, Christopher Snedden, and Victoria Schofield.
Bookstore owners and readers: Those in possession of these books or selling them risk facing prison terms under India’s new criminal code.

What The Government Says

According to the Home Department’s statement:

The books are being banned under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (India’s updated criminal code).
Authorities cited “credible intelligence” indicating that these works are part of a “systemic dissemination” of literature disguised as history or commentary but actually promoting secessionist ideas.
The government claims the books mislead youth, glorify terrorism, and undermine India’s sovereignty.

Legal Consequences

The books are now officially forfeited under the criminal code.
Possession, sale, or circulation may lead to criminal charges.
Offenses tied to such materials could lead to 3 years, 7 years, or life in priso,n depending on the charge, though no arrests have been reported yet.

Reactions

Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, a key resistance leader in Kashmir, publicly condemned the ban, stating:

“Banning books by scholars and reputed historians will not erase historical facts and the repertoire of lived memories of people of Kashmir.”

He also highlighted the contradiction of banning books while hosting a government-organized Book Festival in the region.

Context: Kashmir And Dissent

Kashmir has been a disputed region between India and Pakistan since 1947, with both countries claiming it in full.
Armed insurgency began in the Indian-administered region in 1989. Many Muslim Kashmiris support either independence or joining Pakistan.
India considers the militancy as Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. Pakistan denies the charge.
Over the years, tens of thousands have died, including civilians and soldiers.

Since 2019—when India revoked Kashmir’s special constitutional status—there has been a steady increase in state actions aimed at suppressing dissent.

Recent examples include:

February 2025: Police raided bookstores and confiscated Islamic texts linked to an organization operating in the region.
2011: Charges were filed over a textbook that used a sketch resembling a police officer to illustrate the word “tyrant.”
2010: A college lecturer was arrested for using anti-government questions in an English exam.

Many of these cases remain unresolved due to India’s slow-moving judicial process.

India’s Broader Trend On Censorship

While book bans are relatively rare in India, the current administration has been more aggressive in curbing dissent:

Media Crackdowns: Journalists have been jailed and independent media outlets raided.
Textbook Revisions: Educational materials on Muslim Mughal rulers have been modified or removed.
Historical Narratives: The Modi-led BJP government has sought to revise interpretations of Indian history to align with a Hindu nationalist view.

Last year, an Indian court lifted a decades-old ban on Salman Rushdie’s The Satanic Verses, citing the lack of any official government order supporting the ban.

The Bottom Line

This book ban is part of a wider campaign by Indian authorities to control public narratives in Kashmir and across India. Critics argue it represents an attack on free expression and academic discourse, while the government frames it as essential for maintaining national unity and preventing the spread of extremism.