On January 3, 2025, when a special National Investigation Agency (NIA) court handed life sentences to 28 individuals convicted for their involvement in the brutal murder of Chandan Gupta during the 2018 Kasganj violence. This hard-hitting judgment by Additional District Judge Vivekanand Sharan Tripathi went beyond assigning culpability for the crime, exposing the murky role of certain NGOs in influencing communal cases and judicial processes.
The Kasganj violence was not a spontaneous eruption but a carefully orchestrated conspiracy, according to the court. On January 26, 2018, Chandan Gupta, a spirited youth, participated in a patriotic Tiranga Yatra celebrating Republic Day. As the procession approached the Government Girls Inter College, a group led by Salim, Wasim, and Naseem intercepted it, armed with firearms and other weapons. The mob desecrated the tricolor and demanded participants chant “Pakistan Zindabad.”
When Chandan refused to comply, the mob turned violent, resorting to stone-pelting and gunfire. Salim fired a fatal shot, leaving Chandan critically wounded. Efforts to save him proved futile as he succumbed to his injuries. His father, Sushil Gupta, filed an FIR that would eventually culminate in the conviction of 28 individuals, bringing some closure to a family shattered by communal hate.
Judge Tripathi’s 130-page judgment cast a glaring spotlight on the activities of several NGOs, both domestic and international, which have frequently intervened in cases involving communal tensions. Among those named were:
- Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP), Mumbai
- People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), New Delhi
- Rihaee Manch, Lucknow
- United Against Hate, New Delhi
- Alliance for Justice and Accountability (AJA), New York
- Indian American Muslim Council (IAMC), Washington DC
- South Asia Solidarity Group (SASG), London
The court questioned the motivations of these organisations, asking what vested interests they might have in a communal clash in Kasganj. It further raised alarms about their funding sources and collective objectives.
Further, the Lucknow NIA Court’s judgment on the 2018 Kasganj violence sharply criticised the report titled ‘Truth Of Kasganj: Sham Police Probe Protects Hindus, Frames Muslims’, authored by Zia Ul Jilani and published on August 29, 2018, by Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP). The court highlighted that the report was heavily biased and aimed at influencing judicial proceedings rather than presenting an objective analysis of the events.
CJP, an organisation previously involved in campaigns against then-Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi during the 2002 Gujarat riots, was founded in the aftermath of those riots. Founding members include controversial figures such as Teesta Setalvad, her husband, and Javed Akhtar. The defense counsel admitted that the report did not involve any on-ground investigation in Kasganj, which the court found alarming and indicative of the report’s lack of credibility.
The judgment stated, “Such reports attempt to exert undue pressure on the judiciary, and their content raises questions about the integrity of the investigative process.” The court expressed concerns over NGOs like Citizens for Justice and Peace (Mumbai), Alliance for Justice and Accountability (New York), Indian American Muslim Council (Washington DC), and others, questioning their funding sources and motives.
The court observed that advocacy by certain NGOs risks creating communal biases. It remarked, “When accused persons involved in anti-national activities are brought for trial, certain advocates, reportedly linked to these NGOs, are already present with vakalatnamas to represent them.” The court urged the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Bar Council of India to scrutinise the funding and activities of such organisations.
Furthermore, the court clarified that while every accused is entitled to free legal assistance under the Legal Services Authorities Act and the CrPC, NGOs cannot claim an independent right to provide such aid. Advocacy by communal NGOs, the court noted, could shift the allegiance of the accused towards these organisations rather than the state, undermining faith in judicial processes.
According to OpIndia, the report ‘Truth Of Kasganj: Sham Police Probe Protects Hindus, Frames Muslims’ was released by former IPS officer SR Darapuri, activist Teesta Setalvad, Sandeep Pandey, advocate Shoaib Mohammad, and The Wire columnist Apoorvanand. All have affiliations with left-leaning organisations. The report was criticised for being overtly biased against Hindus and presenting a one-sided narrative of the Kasganj violence.
OpIndia‘s analysis highlighted the report’s accusations that:
- The police investigation was deliberately biased against Muslims.
- Hindus were shielded from accountability, while Muslims were disproportionately arrested and accused of crimes such as murder and rioting.
- The Tiranga Yatra participants instigated the violence, with individuals like Anukalp Chauhan allegedly being involved.
The report recommended withdrawing charges against Muslims, initiating fresh investigations, and prosecuting Hindu leaders of the motorcycle rally. However, the court noted that these claims lacked verifiable evidence, as the authors had not conducted any on-ground investigation.
The court emphasised that the report’s findings were an attempt to manipulate public opinion and judicial processes. It added, “Such recommendations, made without robust evidence, could encourage communal divisions and erode public trust in the judiciary.”
After releasing the report, Teesta Setalvad and her co-authors organised talks and seminars to propagate their findings. Videos from these events, held in August 2018, reveal efforts to disseminate a polarising narrative. As reported by OpIndia, these activities aimed to spread disinformation and foster mistrust in the judiciary.
The court underscored the dangerous implications of NGO involvement in communal violence cases, stating, “The communal sentiment subtly infiltrates human activities at the ideological level and is often manifested through reports and interventions by such NGOs.” By prioritising advocacy over accuracy, such reports undermine judicial independence and communal harmony.
One striking example cited was the Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind’s claim of securing 400 acquittals in Indian courts by March 2019 through their legal assistance. The court emphasised that such outcomes, while ostensibly just, foster a dangerous perception of allegiance to the NGOs rather than to the Constitution and judiciary.
The judgment urged the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Bar Council of India to investigate the funding and activities of the aforementioned NGOs. It called for stringent measures to curb their undue interference in judicial processes and demanded transparency in their operations.
“The communal sentiment subtly infiltrates human activities at the ideological level and is often manifested through reports and interventions by such NGOs. This court has often observed that when accused persons involved in anti-national activities are brought for trial, certain advocates, reportedly linked to these NGOs, are already present with vakalatnamas to represent them,” the judgment read.
For the Gupta family, the judgment was a bittersweet triumph. “This is justice for our family and a tribute to Chandan’s sacrifice for the nation,” said his brother Vivek Gupta. Chandan’s father expressed gratitude for the verdict, which he called a reaffirmation of the Constitution and national pride.
