Today, 29 September 2026, marks 20 years since the horror of Khairlanji.
On this day in 2006, the Bhotmange family was brutally attacked. Surekha Bhotmange and her children—Priyanka, Sudhir and Roshan—were killed by a mob. Priyanka was a young student, studying in the 12th standard, and one of her brothers, Sudhir, was visually impaired. An entire family was wiped out. Their bodies were later recovered from a canal.
The Bhotmanges were Mahar (SC), and their caste is repeatedly highlighted in reporting. But why is the caste identity and social position of the accused discussed far less, even though court records identify several accused as Kunbi and Kalar? If caste is relevant when describing the victims, why is the accused-side caste context so often missing?
The SC/ST Act was applied in the case and charges were framed under it, but the accused were ultimately not convicted under those provisions. The courts held that the prosecution failed to prove that the murders were committed on the ground that the victims belonged to an SC community. That conclusion deserves scrutiny, especially in light of evidence about caste abuses during the attack.
CBI prosecuted 11 people, while dozens of others had initially been arrested or were part of the wider investigation. What happened to the others? Were their individual roles genuinely investigated and ruled out, or did the investigation simply fail to establish sufficient evidence against them? And why is there so little public discussion about the caste and social position of those who were never prosecuted?
Then comes the most disturbing question: Priyanka’s body was found naked, and the judicial record discusses the removal of her clothes before the bodies were disposed of. This does not automatically prove rape. But if her clothes were removed, what was the intention behind stripping her? What exactly happened to the women before they were killed? And why did that conduct not result in conviction for an appropriate sexual offence?
The bodies were taken away and thrown into a canal. What was the purpose of stripping the victims and then disposing of their bodies in this manner? These are not minor details that should disappear from the history of the case.
Khairlanji cannot be reduced to a statistic: “eight convicted, three acquitted, case closed.”
We still need to question the initial police investigation, the treatment of caste evidence, the role of the wider mob, those who were never prosecuted, and the judicial treatment of the sexual humiliation.
20 years later, the questions remain.
Justice is still pending.
MPSC च्या Drug Inspector भरती परीक्षेचा पेपर फुटल्याचे प्रकरण समोर आले, तेव्हा मुख्यमंत्री आणि MPSC चे अध्यक्ष म्हणत होते की, पेपर फक्त एका उमेदवारालाच मिळाला, मात्र आता आणखी दोन उमेदवारांसह चार जणांना अटक झाली, म्हणजे ही सखळी खूप मोठी आहे.
विशेष म्हणजे अटक झालेले दोन उमेदवार COMBINE 2025 MAINS च्या मेरिट लिस्टमध्ये देखील आहेत.
MPSCच्या अवर सचिवांसह आयोगातील इतर अधिकाऱ्यांवरही कारवाई झाली. त्यामुळे त्यांच्या कार्यकाळात घेण्यात आलेल्या इतर परीक्षांच्या पारदर्शकतेबाबत विद्यार्थ्यांच्या मनात प्रश्न निर्माण होणे स्वाभाविक आहे. ही केवळ एका परीक्षेची बाब नाही हा महाराष्ट्रातील लाखो स्पर्धा परीक्षा विद्यार्थ्यांच्या भविष्याचा प्रश्न आहे.
आत्तापर्यंत ११ जणांना अटक झाली, तरी MPSCच्या अध्यक्षांचा राजीनामा घेतला जात नाही हे दुर्दैव आहे.
विद्यार्थ्यांच्या भविष्याशी खेळणाऱ्या या संपूर्ण प्रकरणाची निष्पक्ष आणि सखोल चौकशी झाली पाहिजे. दोषी कोणही असो, त्याच्यावर कठोर कारवाई झालीच पाहिजे.
@Dev_Fadnavis@Mpsc_Andolan@RRPSpeaks
#MPSC #MPSCPaperLeak #DrugInspector #स्पर्धापरीक्षा #विद्यार्थ्यांचा_आवाज #पेपरफुटी #MPSCStudents #महाराष्ट्र
CIA will be so frustrated seeing this!
US Mercenary Matthew Aaron VanDyke & 5 Ukrainians brought to Patiala House Court in NIA case for extention of judicial custody. They're arrested for training Ethnic War group in Myanmar to create unrest in Bharat's NE.
CIA tried too hard for their release but Modi Sarkar told it to STFU in uncompromising language.
Indian Express ने चुनाव आयोग पर अपने लेख में वोटर लिस्ट से जुड़ी शक्तियों, आयोग के कामकाज और Form 6 में बदलाव को लेकर कई दावे किए। लेकिन जब इन दावों को तथ्यों की कसौटी पर परखा गया, तो तस्वीर कुछ और ही सामने आई!
सबूतों के साथ पेश है पूरा Fact Check। दावा बनाम सच्चाई, खुद देखिए इन दावों में कितना दम था!
साहिल वाकोडे के परिजन न्याय की मांग को लेकर धरने पर बैठे हैं, लेकिन पुलिस उन्हें शांतिपूर्ण प्रदर्शन से भी रोक रही है।
क्या अपने बच्चे की मौत पर न्याय मांगना अपराध है? प्रशासन को परिवार पर दबाव बनाने के बजाय निष्पक्ष जांच करानी चाहिए और दोषियों पर सख्त कार्रवाई करनी चाहिए।
साहिल के परिवार की आवाज़ दबाई नहीं जा सकती। न्याय मिलने तक NSUI परिवार और छात्रों के साथ मजबूती से खड़ी रहेगी।
#JusticeForSahilWakode #NSUI
Just read this post from @talk2anuradha.
The sheer stupidity is staggering.
A basic Google reverse image search is all it takes to prove that “house” is a commercial Kerala resort or homestay in Pathanamthitta , not some modest family home belonging to her mythical ST friend who supposedly leveraged reservation for NIT, a PSU job, and then IIM.
She fabricated an entire sob-story around a tourist property and expected no one to notice.
The “liar gene” is strong with this one. 🧬 👇👇 🤡😂
IIT Bombay should issue a clear press release instead of merely tweeting a clarification.
Your earlier statement was false, and an apology for this behaviour is warranted. You have now acknowledged that some of the CCTV footage circulating online was not official. You also say that you are cooperating with the investigating agencies and the Police Department.
Then why avoid issuing a proper press release and putting the complete facts on record?
Silence on such a serious matter only creates more questions. Not issuing a formal clarification should not become a way of hiding facts or shielding anyone responsible.
डुल्ला च्या इशाऱ्यावर तुम्ही डुलू नका. सत्य स्पष्टपणे समोर ठेवा.
The public deserves transparency, not selective tweets.
Sharing the earlier post of 21st Sept 2026 again :
We apologise for the statements contained in our earlier communication concerning the circumstances surrounding the unfortunate demise of Sahil.
The details and circumstances leading up to the incident remain subject to investigation by the appropriate authorities. In view of the ongoing investigation, it was inappropriate to have set out or characterised details relating to the events preceding his demise before they had been duly established through the appropriate investigative process.