Kashmir Bans 25 Books, Setting Off a Dispute Over Security, Scholarship and Memory

Twenty-five books removed from circulation

Authorities in Indian-administered Kashmir banned 25 books on August 5, 2025, using a new criminal procedure law to order the forfeiture of works by scholars, journalists and writers. Police subsequently searched bookstores across the Kashmir Valley, seized stock and inspected stalls at a literary festival in Srinagar.

The Jammu & Kashmir Home Department issued notification S.O. 203 of 2025 on the sixth anniversary of the revocation of the region's semiautonomous status under Article 370 of India's Constitution. Its targets include books by Arundhati Roy, Hafsa Kanjwal, A.G. Noorani, Sumantra Bose, Anuradha Bhasin, Victoria Schofield and Christopher Snedden.

The government says the publications spread false accounts, encourage separatism and could promote violence. Authors, rights groups and political parties have condemned the measure as censorship, arguing that it restricts scholarship, political debate and access to Kashmir's history.

The dispute reaches beyond which titles can remain on a shop shelf. The banned works cover the origins of the Kashmir conflict, Partition, constitutional questions, human rights violations and the experiences of people living under Indian rule. Removing them limits the written accounts available to readers trying to understand those subjects.

As of August 9, the confrontation also carries consequences for booksellers, publishers, students and private readers. The order threatens criminal penalties for selling or possessing the books, while critics warn that the legal mechanism could lead to seizures beyond Kashmir. At its centre is a disagreement about whether the books endanger public security or preserve accounts that authorities want to suppress.

What the government says the books contain

The Home Department declared the titles forfeited under Section 98 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, known as the BNSS. Forfeiture allows authorities to take publications out of circulation and seize copies under the law.

The notification accuses the books of spreading material that threatens India's sovereignty and unity. Among its allegations are that they "propagate false narratives and secessionism," "misguide youth" and "promote violence." Secessionism means seeking to separate a territory from the country that governs it.

Authorities also contend that the publications "distort historical facts," "glorify terrorists" and "excite secessionism." Their argument is that accounts centred on grievance and victimhood, including what the order calls "terrorist heroism," could radicalize young readers, encourage hostility between communities and weaken national integration.

The notification describes the works as "disguised as historical or political commentary." That wording places books presented as research, analysis and opinion within the government's security case against them.

Critics say the order gives broad conclusions without identifying particular passages or evidence of imminent violence. Many of the books come from reputable publishing houses and are recognized as serious scholarship or journalism based on substantial research. The central disagreement is therefore about the content authorities consider dangerous and the evidence needed to justify removing it from public circulation.

Bookstore searches reach a literary festival

Police enforcement followed the notification in Srinagar, Anantnag, Ganderbal and Handwara. Officers searched bookstores for the prohibited titles, questioned sellers and seized stock.

The searches also reached the Chinar Book Festival in Srinagar, where police inspected stalls for banned works. The ban was announced as Indian officials were inaugurating a book festival in the region, placing an official celebration of reading alongside the removal of particular books.

Booksellers face an immediate practical problem: identifying and withdrawing prohibited stock while facing the threat of criminal penalties. Readers also face uncertainty and risk because the order extends its warning to possession, making private ownership a potential offense.

The events sit within a longer sequence of political changes and restrictions described by critics:

• 1989: An armed uprising began in Kashmir, which has since experienced communication blackouts, newspaper bans and the detention of journalists.
• 2019: The revocation of Article 370 removed the region's semiautonomous status. Restrictions increasingly affected academia and civil society as well as the media.
• Earlier in 2025: Police searched bookstores in Srinagar and seized works by Islamic scholar Syed Abul A'la Maududi.
• August 5, 2025: The Home Department issued S.O. 203 of 2025, declaring 25 books forfeited.
• Following the order: Police searched shops across the Kashmir Valley and inspected stalls at the Chinar Book Festival.

Which authors and subjects are affected?

The list brings together Indian, Kashmiri and international writers. Its range includes historical studies, memoirs, investigative journalism, political commentary, feminist testimonies and human rights documentation.

Several of the named works examine how the Kashmir dispute developed and how political authority has been exercised. Others focus on the consequences for people living in the region, including the period after the constitutional changes of 2019.

• Arundhati Roy: The Booker Prize winner's Azadi includes essays addressing state violence and disappearances in Kashmir.
• Hafsa Kanjwal: The academic based in the United States wrote Colonizing Kashmir: State-Building Under Indian Occupation, examining how India consolidated control over the region.
• A.G. Noorani: The constitutional expert's The Kashmir Dispute 1947–2012 provides a comprehensive account of the conflict's legal and political history.
• Sumantra Bose: The London School of Economics professor wrote Contested Lands and Kashmir at the Crossroads, exploring the region's complex geopolitics.
• Anuradha Bhasin: The journalist's The Dismantled State documents the aftermath of the revocation of Article 370.
• Victoria Schofield: The historian wrote Kashmir in Conflict.
• Christopher Snedden: The Australian political scientist wrote Independent Kashmir.

Kashmir: The Case for Freedom, co-authored by Angana Chatterji, is also among the prohibited works. Other titles address the region's political evolution and the experiences of Kashmiris under Indian rule.

For a student or researcher, the breadth of the list matters. The restrictions affect several approaches to studying the same place: constitutional history, political analysis, reporting, testimony and personal experience. Critics see that breadth as a restriction on the range of accounts readers can compare.

How the law and free speech protections collide

Section 98 of the BNSS permits the forfeiture of publications that appear to contain material punishable under specified provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, or BNS. Those provisions include offenses concerning threats to sovereignty, the promotion of enmity and assertions prejudicial to national integration.

The BNSS supplies the procedure for banning and seizing publications, while the relevant BNS provisions concern the underlying criminal offenses. The government's position is that the books contain material falling within those restrictions.

India's Constitution also protects freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a). Restrictions are permitted on limited grounds, including public order and incitement to violence. The dispute turns on where protected discussion ends and punishable speech begins.

The Internet Freedom Foundation, known as IFF, and other rights groups argue that the blanket ban is legally untenable. Their objection is that historical or political arguments cannot be suppressed simply because authorities consider them objectionable.

They point to the Supreme Court's treatment of discussion, advocacy and incitement. Discussion means examining an idea; advocacy means arguing in favour of it; incitement involves urging harmful action. In Shreya Singhal v. Union of India in 2015, the court warned against broad or preventive suppression of speech. Mere discussion or advocacy of an unpopular viewpoint remains protected unless it amounts to direct incitement.

For critics of the Kashmir order, the absence of cited passages or evidence of imminent violence is central to that legal objection. The government, by contrast, bases its action on claims that the publications encourage separatism, hostility and radicalization. No hearing date or deadline for a legal challenge was given.

Authors defend their work

Angana Chatterji, co-author of Kashmir: The Case for Freedom, described the ban as an attempt to turn scholarship into a punishable activity. She also warned about its psychological effect on Kashmiris:

The order underscores the state's intent to criminalise scholarship and render it seditious. The symbolic and material impact of this ban stands to be extensive. It restimulates psychological operations to terrify and isolate Kashmiris, and silence their pain and resistance.

Sumantra Bose rejected the government's accusations and said his work seeks to identify pathways to peace. His response also drew on a family history of facing censorship dating to colonial times.

Anuradha Bhasin defended her book as thoroughly researched and challenged the authorities to demonstrate that it glorifies terrorism. Her objection places the content of the work at the centre of the dispute: what it documents, what it argues and how the government connects it to its security allegations.

The authors' responses share a concern that writing about violence, state policy or disputed history is being treated as a security threat. They defend their books as contributions to understanding Kashmir, while the notification presents them as vehicles for dangerous narratives.

Religious books and political opposition

The August order followed action against religious literature earlier in 2025. Police raided bookstores in Srinagar to seize works by Syed Abul A'la Maududi, an Islamic scholar linked to the banned Jamaat-e-Islami organization.

Critics of those seizures raised concerns about religious freedom and selective enforcement, pointing out that similar books remained available elsewhere in India. Together, the actions have brought both religious writing and political or historical scholarship into the debate over access to books in Kashmir.

Opposition leaders have also condemned the ban on the 25 titles. Former Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti argued that censorship draws attention to ideas rather than silencing them and deepens alienation in Kashmir.

CPI(M) leader M.Y. Tarigami called the order a blatant act of censorship and demanded its revocation. Political opposition to the measure centres on freedom of expression and the place of disagreement in a democracy.

Mirwaiz Umar Farooq, the chief cleric and separatist leader, argued that prohibiting written accounts cannot remove the experiences behind them:

Banning books by scholars and historians will not erase historical facts or lived memories, and exposes the insecurities of those behind such actions.

His response connects the removal of books to a broader argument about memory. People retain experiences and pass them on through conversation and oral histories, even when particular written accounts become harder to obtain.

Why the effects could extend beyond Kashmir

Section 98 allows the seizure of prohibited books potentially across India, rather than only in Kashmir. Critics therefore warn that the consequences of the order could reach readers and sellers far from the places where police have conducted searches.

Publishers, bookshops and online platforms may withdraw titles to avoid legal exposure. If that happens widely, a measure announced in Jammu & Kashmir could produce the practical effect of a national ban by making the books unavailable through ordinary sales channels.

The IFF argues that disputed narratives should be addressed through dialogue and transparency instead of blanket prohibitions. Its concern is that restrictions on scholarship and commentary weaken democratic debate and the public's access to information.

Scholars also fear that publishers will become less willing to print critical work about Kashmir. Such caution could affect books before publication, narrowing what writers can get into print and what students can later find.

The ban has attracted international attention from rights organizations and the media, with concern focused on India's reputation as a democracy tolerant of differing views. Authors, political parties and rights advocates both within India and internationally have condemned the restrictions.

Students and researchers in Kashmir see the removal of these works as an attempt to impose collective amnesia. Their concern is concrete: when books disappear from circulation, studying the region's past and comparing accounts of it become harder.

The struggle over written history and lived memory

Kashmir has experienced communication blackouts, newspaper bans and the detention of journalists. Critics place the new book restrictions within that history, particularly the growing pressure on media, academia and civil society after the 2019 constitutional changes.

Ghazala Wahab, a commentator on security and society, has argued that efforts to deny young Kashmiris access to their own history cannot remove collective memory. Her observation echoes the concern expressed by Farooq: a book can be taken off a shelf while the experiences it records continue to circulate.

Comparisons with colonial and authoritarian censorship have also formed part of the criticism. The shared concern is that controlling access to accounts of the past can shape what later generations are able to study and understand.

Indian writer Nilanjana Roy argued that the prohibition could increase curiosity about the titles rather than extinguish it:

The ban serves as a curated reading list on Kashmir. History shows that such bans rarely succeed, often making the banned material more sought-after.

Banned books have often become symbols of resistance and objects of greater public interest. Digital circulation also makes information harder to suppress. Critics warn that attempts to restrict access can draw attention to the very writing authorities want readers to avoid.

For Kashmir, the immediate change is the removal of 25 books under threat of criminal penalties. The wider dispute concerns who can write, publish and read accounts of the region's history, and whether suppressing those accounts will deepen mistrust and alienation.

Key Points

• The Jammu & Kashmir Home Department banned 25 books on August 5, 2025, through notification S.O. 203 of 2025 under Section 98 of the BNSS.
• The government alleges that the works encourage separatism, distort history and could promote violence. Critics say the order gives broad allegations without identifying specific passages or evidence of imminent violence.
• Police searched bookstores in Srinagar, Anantnag, Ganderbal and Handwara and inspected stalls at the Chinar Book Festival.
• The affected writers include Arundhati Roy, Hafsa Kanjwal, A.G. Noorani, Sumantra Bose, Anuradha Bhasin, Victoria Schofield, Christopher Snedden and Angana Chatterji.
• Rights groups challenge the ban on free speech grounds, citing constitutional protections and the Supreme Court's distinction between discussion, advocacy and incitement.
• Critics warn of consequences for publishing and research across India, while authors and political leaders argue that banning books cannot erase historical facts or lived memories.