SC Judge Highlights Bias Against Muslims and Dalits
Supreme Court judge flags social faultlines, highlighting bias against Muslims and Dalits.
Supreme Court Justice Ujjal Bhuyan on February 21, 2026, highlighted "deep societal faultlines" in India, citing bias against Muslims and Dalits. Speaking at a seminar in Hyderabad organized by the Telangana Judges Association and the Telangana State Judicial Academy, Justice Bhuyan emphasized that Constitutional morality should outweigh “public morality, even if it be the majoritarian view”. He illustrated his point with two instances: a PhD student in Delhi denied accommodation after her Muslim identity was revealed, and an incident in Odisha where parents refused to let their children eat food prepared by a Dalit woman in a mid-day meal program.
Justice Bhuyan referenced the 2009 Naz Foundation v. Union of India judgment, where the Delhi High Court struck down provisions criminalizing homosexuality, asserting that the state cannot prioritize public morality over Constitutional morality. He quoted former US Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall, reminding district court judges that their power comes from the respect earned through independence and fidelity to the Constitution.
In related news, a lawyer approached the Bombay High Court challenging the Maharashtra government’s February 17 decision to scrap the 5 percent reservation for Muslims in education, arguing that the decision was “deliberately and arbitrarily” taken with “racial discrimination against minorities.” The plea claims that the government’s decision violates the fundamental rights of the Muslim community, especially considering the allocation of over ₹350 crore annually to madrasa education while withholding Muslims from mainstream education. The lawyer seeks a stay on the decision and demands the authorities to produce quantified data regarding the condition of the classes and castes mentioned in the original decision that allowed quota for Muslims.
Separately, an AI-generated video depicting Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma shooting at an image of Muslims caused outrage. The video, shared by the Assam BJP unit and later deleted, was condemned as promoting anti-Muslim rhetoric. The video included images of Sarma dressed as a cowboy with text such as “Foreigner free Assam.” This incident underscores the rising anti-Muslim sentiment in India, where Muslims constitute 14 percent of the population and face increasing discrimination. This news is relevant for UPSC exams, particularly GS Paper II (Social Justice) and GS Paper IV (Ethics).
Key Facts
A Supreme Court judge has raised concerns about bias against Muslims and Dalits.
The judge highlighted social faultlines in the country.
The observation underscores challenges related to social justice and equality.
The statement reminds of the need for continued efforts to address discrimination and promote inclusivity.
UPSC Exam Angles
GS Paper II: Social Justice - Issues related to discrimination, reservation, and minority rights.
GS Paper IV: Ethics - Constitutional morality, social justice, and ethical considerations in governance.
Potential questions on the role of the judiciary in protecting minority rights and upholding constitutional values.
A Supreme Court judge has raised concerns about the presence of social faultlines, specifically highlighting bias against Muslims and Dalits. This observation underscores the ongoing challenges related to social justice and equality in the country.
The judge's statement serves as a reminder of the need for continued efforts to address discrimination and promote inclusivity for marginalized communities. The remarks draw attention to systemic issues that require attention from policymakers, civil society, and the judiciary to ensure equal rights and opportunities for all citizens.
Expert Analysis
The recent concerns raised by Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and the legal challenges to policies affecting Muslims highlight the complex interplay between Constitutional Morality, public opinion, and minority rights in India. To fully understand these issues, several key concepts need to be examined.
First, Constitutional Morality refers to adherence to the values and principles enshrined in the Constitution, even when they conflict with popular sentiment. Justice Bhuyan emphasized that Constitutional morality must outweigh “public morality, even if it be the majoritarian view.” This concept is crucial in protecting the rights of marginalized groups, as seen in the Naz Foundation case where the Delhi High Court prioritized Constitutional rights over public disapproval by decriminalizing homosexuality in 2009. The application of Constitutional Morality ensures that the fundamental rights of all citizens are protected, regardless of their religious or social identity.
Second, the concept of Reservations, particularly for socially and educationally backward classes (SEBC), is central to addressing historical inequalities. The Maharashtra government's decision to scrap the 5 percent reservation for Muslims in education, initially introduced in 2014, raises questions about the state's commitment to affirmative action. The Bombay High Court had previously upheld the principle of allowing reservation for Muslims in education, citing “sufficient material and quantifiable data to sustain classification as special backward class.” The legal challenge to the scrapping of this reservation underscores the ongoing debate about the scope and justification for reservations in India.
Third, the issue of Discrimination against minorities, particularly Muslims and Dalits, is a persistent challenge in India. Justice Bhuyan's examples of a Muslim student being denied accommodation and a Dalit woman facing discrimination in a mid-day meal program illustrate the subtle and overt forms of discrimination that continue to exist. Article 15 of the Indian Constitution prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. However, the persistence of discriminatory practices highlights the gap between constitutional ideals and social realities. The AI-generated video depicting Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma shooting at an image of Muslims further exemplifies the prevalence of anti-Muslim sentiment and hate speech.
Finally, the role of the Judiciary in safeguarding Constitutional values and protecting minority rights is paramount. Justice Bhuyan's remarks serve as a reminder to district court judges that their power comes from their independence and fidelity to the Constitution. The judiciary's intervention in cases involving discrimination and reservation policies underscores its crucial role in upholding the principles of equality and social justice. UPSC aspirants should understand these concepts in the context of fundamental rights (GS Paper II), social justice (GS Paper II), and ethics (GS Paper IV).
Visual Insights
Supreme Court Judge on Social Bias
Key takeaway from the news article: A Supreme Court judge highlighted the presence of social faultlines and bias against Muslims and Dalits.
- Bias against Muslims and Dalits
- Highlighted
The judge's statement underscores the ongoing challenges related to social justice and equality in the country. This is relevant for understanding social issues in India.
More Information
Background
Latest Developments
In recent years, there has been increasing focus on issues of discrimination and hate speech against minorities in India. Several reports and studies have highlighted the rise in hate crimes and discriminatory practices targeting Muslims and Dalits. The India Hate Lab's research in 2025 recorded 1,318 hate speech events, with at least 98 percent targeting Muslims.
The government has taken some steps to address these issues, including enacting laws to prevent discrimination and promote social inclusion. However, concerns remain about the effective implementation of these laws and the need for stronger measures to combat hate speech and discrimination. The judiciary continues to play a crucial role in adjudicating cases involving discrimination and hate speech.
Looking ahead, there is a need for greater awareness and education to promote tolerance and understanding. Civil society organizations and human rights groups are working to raise awareness about discrimination and advocate for policy changes. The government's commitment to inclusive growth and social justice will be crucial in addressing these challenges.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Why is a Supreme Court judge commenting on social bias now? What's the context?
Justice Bhuyan's statement comes amidst increasing reports and studies highlighting discrimination and hate speech against minorities, particularly Muslims and Dalits, in recent years. The India Hate Lab's 2025 research, recording over 1,300 hate speech events, with a vast majority targeting Muslims, underscores the urgency of the issue. This context likely prompted the judge to emphasize the importance of Constitutional morality.
2. How does this news about social bias relate to the UPSC syllabus?
This news is relevant to GS Paper II (Social Justice) and GS Paper IV (Ethics). In GS Paper II, it highlights issues related to vulnerable sections of society (Dalits and Muslims) and challenges to social justice. In GS Paper IV, it raises questions about ethics, constitutional morality, and the role of the judiciary in upholding these values.
3. What's the difference between 'Constitutional morality' and 'public morality' as mentioned by the judge?
Constitutional morality refers to adhering to the values and principles enshrined in the Constitution, such as equality, liberty, and justice. Public morality, on the other hand, reflects the prevailing beliefs and values of society, which may sometimes be discriminatory or unjust. The judge emphasized that Constitutional morality should take precedence, even if it conflicts with the majority's views.
4. If a Mains question asks to 'Critically examine the issue of bias against Muslims and Dalits in India,' what should I focus on?
A 'Critically examine' answer should include: * Historical context: Briefly discuss the historical roots of discrimination. * Current manifestations: Provide examples of contemporary bias (hate speech, denial of opportunities, etc.). * Constitutional safeguards: Analyze the effectiveness of constitutional provisions in addressing the issue. * Government initiatives: Evaluate government programs and policies aimed at promoting inclusivity. * Challenges and way forward: Discuss the obstacles to achieving social justice and suggest potential solutions.
- •Historical context: Briefly discuss the historical roots of discrimination.
- •Current manifestations: Provide examples of contemporary bias (hate speech, denial of opportunities, etc.).
- •Constitutional safeguards: Analyze the effectiveness of constitutional provisions in addressing the issue.
- •Government initiatives: Evaluate government programs and policies aimed at promoting inclusivity.
- •Challenges and way forward: Discuss the obstacles to achieving social justice and suggest potential solutions.
5. What specific articles of the Indian Constitution are most relevant to this issue of bias?
Article 14 (Equality before law), Article 15 (Prohibition of discrimination), Article 16 (Equality of opportunity in public employment), Article 17 (Abolition of Untouchability), Articles 25-28 (Freedom of Religion) are the most relevant. These articles collectively aim to ensure equality, prevent discrimination, and protect the rights of all citizens, including Muslims and Dalits.
6. How does the judge's statement align with the government's official position on minority rights and social justice?
While the government has enacted laws to prevent discrimination and promote social inclusion, the judge's statement serves as a reminder that societal biases persist. It underscores the need for continued efforts to translate legal provisions into tangible changes in attitudes and behaviors.
7. What are the key challenges in addressing bias against Muslims and Dalits in India?
Key challenges include: * Deep-rooted social attitudes: Overcoming centuries-old prejudices and stereotypes. * Lack of awareness: Educating the public about the harmful effects of discrimination. * Implementation gaps: Ensuring that laws and policies are effectively enforced. * Political will: Maintaining sustained commitment to social justice. * Intersectionality: Recognizing that individuals may face multiple forms of discrimination.
- •Deep-rooted social attitudes: Overcoming centuries-old prejudices and stereotypes.
- •Lack of awareness: Educating the public about the harmful effects of discrimination.
- •Implementation gaps: Ensuring that laws and policies are effectively enforced.
- •Political will: Maintaining sustained commitment to social justice.
- •Intersectionality: Recognizing that individuals may face multiple forms of discrimination.
8. The news mentions the Naz Foundation case. What was its significance, and why is it relevant here?
The Naz Foundation v. Union of India case (2009) decriminalized homosexuality in India. It's relevant because it demonstrates the judiciary's role in challenging discriminatory laws and upholding Constitutional morality, even when faced with societal opposition. Justice Bhuyan likely cited it to emphasize the importance of judicial intervention in protecting marginalized groups.
9. What is the India Hate Lab, and why is its research mentioned in the context of this news?
The India Hate Lab is a research organization that tracks and documents hate speech events in India. Its 2025 report, which recorded a high number of hate speech incidents targeting Muslims, provides empirical evidence of the rising trend of discrimination and hostility against minorities. This data supports the judge's concerns about societal faultlines and the need for greater social justice.
10. For Prelims, what is a potential MCQ trap related to Article 15 that UPSC might set based on this news?
Potential Trap: UPSC might frame an MCQ stating that Article 15 prohibits discrimination based on 'religion, race, caste, sex, and place of birth and *language*.' Exam Tip: Remember that Article 15 does NOT explicitly include 'language' as a prohibited ground for discrimination. This is a common trick to test your precise knowledge of constitutional provisions.
Exam Tip
Remember that Article 15 does NOT explicitly include 'language' as a prohibited ground for discrimination. This is a common trick to test your precise knowledge of constitutional provisions.
Practice Questions (MCQs)
1. Which of the following statements accurately reflects the concept of Constitutional Morality? 1. It is synonymous with public morality and reflects the views of the majority. 2. It prioritizes adherence to the values and principles enshrined in the Constitution, even when they conflict with popular sentiment. 3. It is solely determined by the legislature through enacted laws. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- A.1 only
- B.2 only
- C.1 and 3 only
- D.2 and 3 only
Show Answer
Answer: B
Statement 1 is INCORRECT: Constitutional morality is NOT synonymous with public morality; it often conflicts with it, as it protects minority rights against majoritarian views. Statement 2 is CORRECT: Constitutional morality prioritizes adherence to constitutional values, even when they conflict with popular sentiment. Statement 3 is INCORRECT: Constitutional morality is interpreted and upheld by the judiciary, not solely determined by the legislature. The judiciary ensures that laws align with constitutional principles.
2. In the context of reservations in India, consider the following statements: 1. The Bombay High Court upheld reservations for Muslims in education based on quantifiable data demonstrating their backwardness. 2. The Maharashtra government's decision to scrap the 5 percent reservation for Muslims in education was challenged in the Bombay High Court. 3. Reservations for Muslims in government jobs are permitted beyond the 50% ceiling set by the Supreme Court. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- A.1 and 2 only
- B.2 and 3 only
- C.1 and 3 only
- D.1, 2 and 3
Show Answer
Answer: A
Statement 1 is CORRECT: The Bombay High Court upheld the principle of allowing reservation for Muslims in education, citing “sufficient material and quantifiable data to sustain classification as special backward class.” Statement 2 is CORRECT: The Maharashtra government's decision to scrap the 5 percent reservation for Muslims in education was indeed challenged in the Bombay High Court. Statement 3 is INCORRECT: The Bombay High Court did not allow breaching the 50% ceiling in public jobs for Muslims and stayed the application of the ordinance in that respect.
3. Which of the following Articles of the Indian Constitution prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth?
- A.Article 14
- B.Article 15
- C.Article 16
- D.Article 17
Show Answer
Answer: B
Article 15 of the Indian Constitution explicitly prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. This is a fundamental right guaranteed to all citizens.
4. Assertion (A): Constitutional morality is essential for protecting the rights of marginalized groups. Reason (R): Public morality, which often reflects the views of the majority, can sometimes undermine the fundamental rights of minorities. In the context of the above statements, which of the following is correct?
- A.Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A
- B.Both A and R are true, but R is NOT the correct explanation of A
- C.A is true, but R is false
- D.A is false, but R is true
Show Answer
Answer: A
Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A. Constitutional morality ensures that the rights of marginalized groups are protected, especially when public morality, reflecting the views of the majority, may undermine those rights.
Related Articles
NCERT Textbook Revisions Spark Controversy: Key Changes and Concerns
High Court halts 'Kerala Story 2' release, asks CBFC review
Kerala Inaugurates Ayurveda Research Institute, Seeks Global Recognition
Telangana Government Plans Elaborate Iftar Dinner Events in Hyderabad
Women's Stories from Northeast India: Conflict, Resilience, and Identity
Source Articles
Bias against Muslims and Dalits: Supreme Court judge flags social ‘faultlines’ | Legal News - The Indian Express
No gender, religion bias in orders by district courts, finds study | India News - The Indian Express
Dalitality: Hindu, Muslim, and the nonsense of it | The Indian Express
Avoidable: Supreme Court Collegium to Allahabad HC judge on his remarks against Muslims | India News - The Indian Express
About the Author
Anshul MannSoftware Engineer & Current Affairs Analyst
Anshul Mann writes about Social Issues at GKSolver, breaking down complex developments into clear, exam-relevant analysis.
View all articles →