PRIME MINISTER MODI in his address to the nation from the ramparts of Red Fort on the occasion of 80th Independence Day stated that his government has succeeded in eliminating the armed Naxals in the jungles., While doing so he warned about “Dimagi Naxals” (intellectual Naxals) waiting for opportunities to unleash violence, unrest and create turmoil in society. And so, he underlined the necessity of identifying and isolating them.
“Dimagi Naxal” Constitutes Hate Speech
Such utterances of the Prime Minister outraged the nation. This outrage was manifested in the remarks made in several quarters disapproving the term Dimagi Naxal which is utterly contemptuous and represents a form of hate speech. Senior opposition leader from Congress, P. Chidambaram, declared on X that he was ”proud to be a Dimagi Naxal.” “All cockroaches by definition are,”said Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra. Similarly, Aam Aadmi Party national convenor Arvind Kejriwal took pride for being a “Dimagi Naxal” because he is a “true patriot” and does not fear the BJP. He charged that the BJP would not have spared even Bhagat Singh and B.R. Ambedkar and called them using the same obnoxious term.
The countrywide uproar against Modi’s usage of the term “Dimagi Naxal” became so intense that the Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju was forced to issue a clarification that that the Prime Minister never used it against the opposition but at those who stand for Maoists, attack the Constitution, back separatists for restoration of special status for Jammu and Kashmir or seek to sever the chicken neck to separate North East from the rest of India.
Giving a sinister twist to the term “Dimagi Naxals” BJP Rajya Sabha MP Brij Lal called them “Intellectual Naxals” who do not live in forests carrying weapons but wreak havoc by employing their intellect. He claimed that such categories of Naxals appear as professors, teachers, NGO operators, intellectuals, poets and authors and they by their written and spoken words spread violent ideology targeting the youth.
The term “Dimagi Naxals” is an affront to the constitutional imperatives anchored in freedom of expression and dignity of the individual which needs to be secured.
Diamgi Naxal Reminiscent of British Playbook Against Gandhi
In using term the “Dimagi Naxals” in a calculated manner, the Prime Minister is ominously targeting those vast populace, specially the educated and cerebral sections, who through their articulations and expositions interrogate his regime and compel it to adhere to the constitutional mandate to remaining accountable to the legislature and the people. It is reminiscent of the British rulers slapping Mahatma Gandhi in 1922 with sedition charges for the contents of one of his 1921 articles, “Tampering with Loyalty”. In defence of that charge, they argued in the court on March 18, 1922 that being a highly educated man and an influential leader on the strength of his writings, Gandhi could cause considerable harm to the colonial regime. They argued that his writings, which persuasively appealed to people to follow non-violence, openly preached disaffection towards the Government and instigated others to overthrow it. Therefore, they urged the court that Gandhi deserved the severest punishment.
The colonial rulers followed a play book to slap sedition charges against Gandhi for his writings which they alleged were spreading disaffection against British Raj in India. They cited his high educational qualifications and impactful written articulations as factors behind his decisive leadership in mobilising vast masses of people against British rule in India. That same play book of British colonial rulers is grimly manifested in a glaring manner in the Prime Minister’s formulation of “Dimagi Naxals” to coercively target people, who question the regime he heads on the strength of their ideas.
It is instructive to note that the British rulers in India apart from hurling sedition provisions of the Indian Penal Code against Gandhi in 1922 for his writings critical of the colonial rule in India, also had threatened him with stringent measures for his agitation during the Khilafat agitation in 1920. Writing in Young India on July 28, 1920, Gandhi referred to Mr. Montagu who while answering questions put in the House of Commons regarding the Khilafat agitation and Gandhi’s role in launching non-cooperation movement to paralyse British regime, stated that the central and the local Governments had full power to deal with the situation.
“This statement of Mr. Montagu” Gandhi stated, “has been regarded in some quarters as a threat.” “It has even been considered to be a blank cheque for the Government of India to re-establish the reign of terror if they chose,” he wrote with deep anguish. “It is certainly inconsistent with his desire to base the Government on the goodwill of the people,” Gandhi emphatically claimed.
His words, “It has even been considered to be a blank cheque for the Government of India to re-establish the reign of terror if they chose,” are evocative in the context of Prime Minister employing the term “Dimagi Naxals” and the necessity of “identifying and isolating them.”
It is reminiscent of the British rulers slapping sedition charges on Mahatma Gandhi in 1922. In defence of which, they argued that being a highly educated man and an influential leader on the strength of his writings, Gandhi could cause considerable harm to the colonial regime.
“Dimagi Naxal” A Blanket Cheque for Repression
Doesn’t the phraseology “Dimagi Naxals” constitute “a blank cheque” for the Modi regime to take stringent action to suppress dissent or any protest by people based on the fundamental right guaranteed to them by the Constitution?
Let us recall the nationwide outrage caused by the arrests of five activists – Sudha Bharadwaj, Varavara Rao, Gautam Navlakha, Vernon Gonsalves and Arun Ferreira simply on the specious ground that they were “Urban Naxals.” The Supreme Court, while hearing a public interest litigation filed by renowned intellectuals such as Romila Thapar and Prabhat Patnaik who had challenged their arrest and police remand, had observed in its interim order that the activists be kept under house arrest and remarked that dissent is the safety valve of democracy, and any attempt to stifle it would result in an explosion. Very sadly eventually those activists were arrested and suffered incarceration for several years till they got bail.
Now the term “Dimagi Naxal” coined by the Prime Minister might imperil dissent in case it is used as “a blank cheque” to suppress voices questioning the powers that be and demanding their accountability for their acts of commission and omission.
On August 17, 2026, Indian Express in its editorial, “PM links young to Viksit Bharat — in that Bharat, celebrate the ‘dimag’,” very appropriately observed that, “There is no place for isolating or targeting anyone on the basis of their ideas —their dimag. The PM is right when he says yuva shakti will fuel the journey to Viksit Bharat, but that calls for celebrating the power of thought and freedom from fear, so that questions are asked and there is an un-afraid search for answers. Only that can shape and refine what it means to be viksit.”
The term “Dimagi Naxals” is an affront to the constitutional imperatives anchored in freedom of expression and dignity of the individual which needs to be secured. If the Prime Minister of India would use the ramparts of Red Fort on the anniversary of Independence Day to negate these constitutional imperatives, then he should be mindful that now the youth of India are in the forefront of their movement to uphold the Constitution and make the Government accountable. They have succeeded in forcing Dharmendra Pradhan to resign as the Union Education Minister on the issue of NEET-UG exam paper leak. When students started protesting at Jantar Mantar, Pradhan described them as “B team of dehshatgards” (B-team of terrorists). Students were dismayed and through their resilient protests in face of lathi charge, tear gas shells and pellet guns forced Pradhan to quit his office. So the term “Dimagi Naxals,” which captures the playbook of British rulers, would be hollowed out, and the Constitution would register a resounding victory over it on the strength of the youth of India.