Kashmir Book Audit Triggers Fight Over History, Security and Academic Freedom

A sweeping review reaches every level of education

Authorities in Indian administered Kashmir have ordered schools, colleges, universities, coaching centres and public libraries to inspect their entire collections for what they call inappropriate or objectionable content. The review covers printed books, journals, research papers, dissertations, doctoral theses and digital material held on university websites or electronic repositories.

Institutions must identify and report publications that may violate religious sentiments, Indian law, educational values or established norms. The order also lists material that authorities believe promotes, glorifies, legitimises or justifies terrorism, violent extremism, secessionism, radicalisation, communal disharmony or activity harmful to India’s sovereignty and security.

The directive does not provide a precise definition of objectionable material. That uncertainty has become the centre of the dispute. School Education Director Naseer Ahmad Wani said a committee would review books in schools and libraries, while officials have instructed institution heads to submit details of any publication they flag, including its title, author, publisher, publication year and number of copies.

Education departments have also introduced reporting chains and personal accountability for institutional heads. In colleges, the review has been given fixed deadlines, with reports expected to move from departments to district offices and then to senior officials. The process is expected to be repeated periodically.

How did two books set off the wider investigation?

The controversy began with two books supplied to government school libraries under the Samagra Shiksha education programme. The titles, Personalities and Legends of J&K and Great Personalities of Jammu and Kashmir, contained profiles of politicians, writers, activists, poets and historians. They also included entries on figures associated with Kashmir’s separatist movement.

Critics within the Bharatiya Janata Party, which governs India nationally, objected to references describing some separatist figures as important personalities or martyrs. The books also used terms such as India Held Kashmir and India Occupied Kashmir, language that challenges New Delhi’s description of the territory as an integral part of India. BJP representatives said the books could influence young people towards separatism and militant violence.

The books had been approved as part of a much wider procurement process. Officials reportedly selected hundreds of titles from hundreds of publishers for distribution to thousands of government schools. The discovery of the two disputed volumes led to their withdrawal, an inquiry into the procurement process and the suspension of eight education officials. Police also arrested three people connected with the books, according to the authorities and reports of the investigation.

The Lieutenant Governor of Jammu and Kashmir, Manoj Sinha, later directed officials to create a permanent system for reviewing books before they enter educational institutions. The University of Jammu banned the disputed titles and blacklisted their authors and publishers. Some institutions were also asked to examine online material and remove files that officials consider objectionable.

What does the government say it is trying to prevent?

Government officials say the exercise is a security measure rather than a general restriction on reading. Their argument rests on Kashmir’s history of armed conflict and the belief that educational material can be used to glorify militant groups or encourage political violence.

Sunil Sethi, a BJP spokesperson, said supporters of separatism should not be permitted to praise separatist leaders under the protection of academic freedom. He argued that peace had been restored with difficulty and that controversial teaching material could threaten that stability.

Imran Nabi Dar, spokesperson for the governing National Conference in Jammu and Kashmir, said the purpose was to keep unnecessary disputes out of classrooms rather than prevent people from accessing books in private. The administration has also said that material used in schools should be factually accurate, suitable for students’ ages and consistent with constitutional values.

There is a legitimate distinction between a publication that directly urges violence and a scholarly work that examines why violence occurred. The debate in Kashmir concerns where officials draw that line, who makes the decision and whether the same rules will be applied to every political or religious viewpoint.

Indian law permits restrictions on freedom of expression in areas such as national security, public order and incitement. Human rights groups argue that those restrictions must be specific, necessary and proportionate. A broad search through every library, they say, risks treating historical discussion as a security offence without showing a direct connection to violence.

Why are academics worried about the wording?

The phrase objectionable content can cover a wide range of material. It might refer to an explicit call for violence, a factual error, a disputed interpretation of history, a criticism of government policy or language that offends a religious community. Without clear criteria, librarians and teachers may remove books simply because they fear punishment.

A Kashmir studies teacher, speaking without being named, said the region’s history, education and identity are deeply contested. The teacher said the review raises legitimate concerns about academic freedom and the role of the state in deciding which narratives are acceptable.

Political scientist Noor Ahmad Baba said restrictions of this kind conflict with the constitutional protection of speech and expression. He also warned that broad bans can be counterproductive because material removed from physical libraries often remains available online or outside the territory.

Writer and journalist Anuradha Bhasin, whose work was among 25 books banned in 2025, described the latest action as an attempt to intimidate readers and writers. She said books should not be treated like weapons and questioned how officials could examine thousands of publications while reliably judging their context.

Even if there is objectionable content here and there, how does that matter? After all, books are not bombs.

Political scientist Sumantra Bose, whose books were also included in the earlier ban, called the new process unreasonable. He said an authority could spend enormous amounts of time searching through a vast number of books without producing a sound basis for deciding which historical accounts should remain available.

What happened in the earlier ban on 25 books?

The latest audit follows a separate order issued in August 2025 that declared 25 books forfeited to the government. The list included works by Arundhati Roy, A.G. Noorani, Sumantra Bose, Victoria Schofield and other scholars, journalists and writers. Authorities accused the books of spreading false narratives, encouraging secessionism or presenting terrorism in a favourable way. The ban is being challenged in court.

The books addressed subjects including the history of the Kashmir dispute, enforced disappearances, political repression, feminist resistance, governance after the removal of Article 370 and the experiences of civilians. The International Federation for Human Rights and the World Organisation Against Torture said the order breached freedom of expression, access to information and academic freedom. They argued that the authorities had not shown evidence of a direct and immediate threat caused by the publications.

The groups also pointed to India’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Those agreements protect the rights to seek, receive and share information, including views that challenge governments. Academic freedom generally includes the ability to conduct research, publish findings and examine official accounts.

The enforcement of the 2025 order included raids on bookshops in Srinagar and the seizure of titles. In one operation, police confiscated more than 600 books linked to Jamaat e Islami and the writings of Islamic scholar Abul Ala Maududi. Authorities said the books promoted the ideology of an organisation banned in Kashmir. Booksellers said many titles were legally published and had long been available in India.

Some shop owners said the raids pushed them to return books to suppliers and remove politically sensitive material from their shelves. Even when a formal ban is unclear, the fear of arrest, seizure or questioning can lead to self censorship.

How does the dispute affect Kashmir’s contested history?

Kashmir is claimed in full by India and Pakistan, which control different parts of the region. The Indian administered side experienced an armed separatist insurgency from the late 1980s. India has accused Pakistan of supporting militant groups, while Pakistan denies the charge. The conflict has caused tens of thousands of deaths and left a large civilian record of displacement, detention, disappearances and political violence.

That history cannot be separated easily from classroom teaching. A study of Kashmir may need to discuss the 1947 partition, the rule of Maharaja Hari Singh, the competing claims of India and Pakistan, the United Nations, the insurgency, military operations, human rights allegations and the political aspirations of different communities.

Government supporters say accounts that praise armed groups or present India as an occupying power are political propaganda rather than education. Critics respond that students cannot understand the dispute if they are shown only the official national account. Studying a claim is not the same as endorsing it, they say.

Syed Agha Ruhullah Mehdi, a member of parliament from Srinagar, said libraries should preserve knowledge rather than act as instruments for a government’s preferred political story.

The presence of a book in a library is not an endorsement of its contents. It is an acknowledgement that scholarship demands access, debate and critical inquiry.

Rao Farman Ali, a Kashmir based author and journalist, said material about resistance and separatism may look dangerous through a security lens, yet it remains necessary for understanding the region’s past. He said university research requires access to primary sources, secondary sources and competing interpretations.

Why does the 2019 constitutional change matter?

In August 2019, New Delhi removed Jammu and Kashmir’s special constitutional status and divided the former state into federally administered territories. The move placed the region under more direct central control. An elected local government has since returned, though the Lieutenant Governor retains wide authority over administration and security.

Critics say the period since 2019 has brought tighter restrictions on journalists, activists, civil society organisations and educational institutions. They view the book audit as part of a larger effort to control public discussion while presenting the region as stable and normal.

Supporters of the government reject that interpretation. They say the security environment remains sensitive and that institutions must prevent material that could encourage violence. The administration has described schools and universities as places for nation building and constitutional education, with zero tolerance for separatist narratives.

The disagreement reflects a wider debate in India about academic freedom. Researchers have faced pressure over campus protests, public criticism, research topics and teaching materials. Academic freedom indexes have recorded a sharp decline in India’s score since the middle of the last decade, though the causes and interpretation of those rankings are contested.

Could screening create silence instead of security?

Even a review aimed at stopping incitement can produce wider effects when its standards are vague. Librarians may avoid purchasing books about Kashmir. Teachers may skip subjects likely to attract official attention. Students may hesitate to ask questions about political history. Authors may decide that publishing research on the region is too risky.

Victoria Schofield, a British historian whose book Kashmir in Conflict was among the 25 banned titles, said governments have often used book bans to restrict access to information. She argued that understanding every side of a conflict is necessary for dialogue and reconciliation.

You cannot resolve a conflict if you are not fully apprised of the facts.

Critics also warn that removing books from libraries does not remove curiosity. Students can find many titles on the internet, in private collections or outside Jammu and Kashmir. A ban may make a book more attractive while depriving students who lack reliable internet access of the chance to study it carefully.

Supporters of the audit answer that access alone does not make a book suitable for a school library. They say younger students require age appropriate material and that teachers should not be expected to present propaganda as established fact. Their preferred solution is tighter procurement and review by qualified educationists.

Several academics have proposed that independent committees of historians, librarians, university teachers and subject specialists should assess disputed works. They say any removal should include written reasons, an appeals process and a distinction between analysis, advocacy and incitement.

What is at stake for students and libraries?

Libraries have traditionally served as places where readers encounter conflicting ideas. Their role is different from that of a government communications office. A library can hold a book that contains disputed claims while teachers help students test those claims against other evidence.

The current process places librarians and institution heads in a difficult position. They must inspect large collections under deadlines while facing possible legal action for failing to identify material authorities later consider unlawful. The result may be a collection shaped less by scholarly value than by fear of official reaction.

For Kashmir’s students, the consequences reach beyond a reading list. History and political science students need access to the sources that shaped competing accounts of the dispute. Literature students need to read writers who describe displacement, grief and resistance. Law students need to examine constitutional arguments and security legislation. Removing those materials can narrow the questions students are able to ask.

The government has not said how many books will ultimately be removed under the new review or whether institutions will publish their findings. The court challenge to the earlier ban may also determine how broadly authorities can use security laws against scholarly and journalistic works.

The Bottom Line

• Authorities ordered educational institutions across Indian administered Kashmir to inspect books, research and digital material.
• The review followed controversy over two books that included profiles of separatist figures and disputed descriptions of Kashmir.
• The government says it is preventing incitement, radicalisation and unlawful propaganda in classrooms.
• Academics and opposition leaders say vague standards may encourage self censorship and erase contested history.
• A separate 2025 order banned 25 books by prominent writers and scholars, and that action is being challenged in court.
• The central dispute is whether libraries should remove politically sensitive material or preserve it for critical study.