As Kashmir varsities cull ‘objectionable’ books, fear of losing academic rigour grows among scholars

Published 2026-07-11 · Updated 2026-07-11 · 4 min · 588 words

UPSC CSE Context

Why in News: Kashmir University and schools are screening and removing books deemed 'objectionable' following official orders, sparking concerns over academic freedom. Syllabus Connection: Polity: Fundamental Rights (Article 19(1)(a) - freedom of speech and expression), Education, and Centre-State Relations. Exam Relevance: Relevant for debates on academic freedom, censorship, national security vs. constitutional rights, and education policy in sensitive regions. ## Core Issue Widespread removal of books from Kashmir's educational institutions raises fears of self-censorship and loss of academic rigour. Key Development: Official orders mandate screening of all books in universities and schools without specifying titles, leading to arbitrary removal of hundreds of books. Stakeholders:

• Directorate of School Education, Kashmir
• J&K regional parties (PDP, NC)
• Scholars and professors
• Students
• Publishers ## Static Knowledge High-Value Background:
• Samagra Shiksha Scheme is a centrally sponsored scheme for school education, integrating pre-school to class 12. Exam Linkage:
• Useful for questions on freedom of speech, academic freedom, and state intervention in education in conflict zones. Concepts in Context:
• Self-censorship: When individuals suppress their own expression due to fear of repercussions, often more damaging than state censorship.
• Academic rigour: The quality of scholarship based on comprehensive, unbiased engagement with diverse sources. Institutions and Mechanisms:
• Kashmir University: Central university in J&K, now involved in book screening. ## Dynamic Analysis ### Constitutional/Legal
• The screening orders may violate Article 19(1)(a) if they lead to arbitrary removal without clear guidelines, as vague orders invite self-censorship.
• Reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) must be proportionate; blanket removal of books without specific titles may fail proportionality.
• The circular's requirement that books be 'consistent with the Constitution' is broad and could be misused to suppress legitimate academic discourse. ### Governance
• The lack of specific titles in the order shifts responsibility to departments, creating fear and arbitrary decisions.
• The committee tasked with collecting audit reports may lack academic expertise, leading to bureaucratic overreach.
• The order's threat of disciplinary action for non-compliance pressures institutions to over-comply, harming academic freedom. ### Education
• Removal of books on Kashmir's history and personalities (e.g., Maqbool Bhat, Syed Ali Geelani) impoverishes scholarship and introduces bias.
• The incident highlights tension between national security concerns and academic freedom in conflict-affected regions. ### Political
• Regional parties (PDP, NC) criticize the move as a 'purge' targeting Kashmir's identity and history.
• The order follows a book profiling separatist leaders circulated under a central scheme, indicating political sensitivity.
• The state's previous removal of authors like A.G. Noorani and Arundhati Roy shows a pattern of ideological control. ## Mains Value Addition Arguments:
• Academic freedom is essential for a vibrant democracy and must be protected even in sensitive regions.
• The state has a legitimate interest in preventing material that promotes terrorism, but this must be balanced with constitutional guarantees.
• Historical scholarship requires access to diverse sources; removing books on separatist leaders hinders understanding of complex issues. Data Points:
• Over 50 academic departments of Kashmir University involved in screening.
• 25 books removed in 2025 from KU by authors like Snedden, Noorani, Bose, etc. Counterpoints:
• The state argues that books glorifying terrorism or secessionism are not protected speech under Article 19(2).
• Similar censorship exists in other countries to protect national security, but the process must be transparent. ## Way Forward
• Establish clear, specific guidelines for book screening with involvement of academic experts to avoid arbitrariness.
• Create an independent review committee with scholars to assess contested books, ensuring due process.
• Promote academic freedom while addressing security concerns through dialogue with universities and political parties.
• Revisit the circular to remove vague language and ensure compliance with constitutional guarantees.

Primary/reference source: National News