Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh — A local court has rejected a closure report filed by the police in a case against Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) spokesperson Priyanka Bharti. The case relates to an incident from December 2024, when Bharti allegedly tore pages of the Manusmriti during a live television debate.
The Manusmriti, an ancient Hindu scripture attributed to sage Manu, has long been criticized for its prescriptions on caste and gender roles. Bharti’s symbolic act during a heated TV debate on India TV and TV9 Bharatvarsh sparked immediate controversy, drawing strong reactions across political and social lines.
On September 6, 2025, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Rashi Tomar dismissed the police’s closure report. The ruling followed a protest petition filed by Bharat Tiwari, secretary of the Rashtriya Savarn Parishad, who argued that the case should proceed due to the offense caused to the Hindu community.
Complaint and FIR Background
Tiwari’s complaint, filed soon after the December broadcast, accused Bharti of deliberately insulting Hindu beliefs. He alleged that tearing the Manusmriti was not only disrespectful but also aimed at spreading misinformation about the scripture to provoke unrest.
Following the complaint, Aligarh Police registered a First Information Report (FIR) against Bharti. The FIR cited provisions under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) dealing with acts intended to outrage religious sentiments.
Police investigations, however, initially concluded there was insufficient evidence to pursue the matter further, leading to the submission of a closure report. With the court’s latest order, that report stands rejected, keeping the case alive.
Political Reactions and Social Debate
The court’s ruling has reignited discussions around freedom of expression, religious sensitivities, and political symbolism. Supporters of Bharti claim her actions highlight ongoing caste and gender inequalities and must be protected under democratic rights.
Opponents, however, view the act as an attack on Hindu culture. Organizations like the Rashtriya Savarn Parishad have demanded accountability, arguing that televised gestures of desecration inflame tensions in a society already marked by sharp divisions.
The incident has also gained traction on social media. Hashtags both defending and condemning Bharti trended at different times, underscoring India’s polarized digital landscape.
Legal and Political Implications
By rejecting the closure report, the court has ensured that legal scrutiny will continue. Bharti may now face trial depending on how the case progresses.
Legal experts note that while the BNS prohibits deliberate insults to religious texts, courts must also balance these laws with constitutional rights to free speech. Similar cases in the past have tested this balance, often producing mixed judgments.
For the RJD, the controversy adds political weight. The party, which has historically positioned itself as a defender of marginalized communities, may use the case to rally support. However, opponents are likely to accuse it of promoting divisive politics.
Looking Ahead
The next hearing will likely focus on whether enough evidence exists to frame charges against Bharti. Observers say the case could set an important precedent on the limits of symbolic protest in India’s increasingly sensitive socio-religious landscape.
As debates over the Manusmriti continue, the Aligarh court’s ruling ensures that Bharti’s act, and its political and cultural ramifications, remain firmly in public focus.