In New Delhi on 23 November, a motley of left-leaning and radical groups gathered under the cover of “anti-pollution” protests. While the public concern was air quality, many of the participants used the platform to express deeper political grievances. Among them were outfits known for their pro-Naxal leanings — notably Bhagat Singh Chhatra Ekta Manch (bsCEM) and The Himkhand.

Alongside these, the Fraternity Movement — student wing of Welfare Party of India, itself linked to the father of controversial activist Umar Khalid — featured among the protesters. The Movement describes itself under the banner of “Democracy, Social Justice and Fraternity.” On paper, it claims to defend democratic rights, secularism, constitutional values, and social justice. But in reality, beneath this polished image lies a darker current of Islamist-leaning and divisive activism.

Back in December 2019, during anti-CAA protests, members associated with this group reportedly blocked operations at Calicut International Airport. This act of direct disruption highlighted the group’s willingness to effect social unrest under the guise of political protest.

Fraternity Movement’s Stand Against Ayodhya’s Ram Mandir

The building of the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya — after the verdict of the Supreme Court of India — triggered strong reactions from several Islamist and left-liberal circles. The Fraternity Movement was no exception. In a post on X (formerly Twitter), the group openly criticized the consecration of Ram Lalla, framing it as a betrayal of justice.

In their words, they portrayed the demolished Babri Masjid — built under the Mughal ruler Babur — as a symbol of justice and democracy. In stark contrast, they condemned the Ram Mandir and its consecration ceremony as a “violent, criminal, and immoral ‘victory’ of Hindutva extremism.”

They wrote:

“The inauguration of the Ram Mandir has turned into a spectacle with the RSS-BJP government, its various machineries, and allies promoting and celebrating the violent, criminal, and immoral ‘victory” of Hindutva extremism over justice and democracy, with absolute impunity,”

This language reveals their deep opposition — not just to the temple’s construction, but to what they perceive as a larger ideological takeover.

Fraternity Movement Blasts Judiciary as “RSS’s Tool” After Malegaon Verdict

The group’s criticism of state institutions did not stop at public protests. When a special court acquitted all accused in the 2008 Malegaon blast case — including Sadhvi Pragya Thakur and Lt. Col. Prasad Purohit — Fraternity Movement unleashed strong condemnation.

They accused the judiciary of being a “tool of Sangh Parivar’s communal agenda,” suggesting the verdict was part of a larger communal design. As they put it:

“…Fraternity Movement strongly condemns the shocking acquittal of all accused in the 2008 Malegaon bomb blast case, including Sadhvi Pragya Thakur, Lt. Col. Prasad Purohit, and others linked to the Sangh Parivar ecosystem. This verdict is a grave miscarriage of justice and an open assault on the democratic and moral fabric of the Indian Republic. The 2008 Malegaon blast was a targeted act of terror that killed 6 innocent civilians and injured over 100. It was not just a crime, but a communal hate act, a clear example of Hindutva terrorism…”

To provide context: on 29 September 2008, a bomb detonated near a mosque in Malegaon city, Nashik — six people lost their lives, and many more were injured. The accused spent several years behind bars, even without formal conviction.

Most recent media reports confirm that on 31 July 2025, the special National Investigation Agency (NIA) court in Mumbai acquitted all seven accused after nearly 17 years, citing lack of “reliable and cogent evidence.”

Nonetheless, the acquittal triggered strong condemnation from Fraternity Movement — who viewed it as symptomatic of institutional bias.

Fraternity Movement Backs Accused in Bhima Koregaon violence — Support for Professor Hany Babu

Not surprisingly, the Movement has also shown solidarity with those accused in other controversial cases. In July this year, it publicly supported Professor Hany Babu — charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) for alleged involvement in the 2018 Bhima Koregaon violence.

The group claimed that Babu was wrongfully jailed and denied adequate medical treatment. They described his incarceration as part of “a broader attack on academic freedom, dissent, and democratic rights.”

Yet, according to the NIA’s chargesheet, Babu was accused of inciting violence and plotting terrorism. Allegedly, a letter found on his computer laid out a conspiracy against the current Prime Minister. Babu denied the allegations, stating the letter was neither written nor addressed to him.

Moreover, authorities alleged Babu had links to a banned extremist group — the Communist Party of India (Maoist) — and had affiliations with a committee backing a known Naxal ideologue. While Babu’s bail plea was denied in 2023 by the Bombay High Court, his 2024 effort to approach the Supreme Court was withdrawn. His lawyers said the move was due to an “absence of a favourable judge,” and they planned to file again in the High Court.

This isn’t the first time such “judicial manoeuvring” has been claimed. Similar patterns appeared in the prolonged legal saga of Umar Khalid, where multiple bail pleas were withdrawn — yet supporters outside continued to call it a “travesty of justice.”

Fraternity Movement Warns of Electoral Roll Revision in Bihar — Calls SIR an “NRC in Disguise”

Recently, the Election Commission of India (ECI) announced a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of the voter list in Bihar, ahead of elections. The stated aim was to weed out duplicate or fake entries and clean up the electoral roll.

Opposition parties largely criticised the move, suggesting it targeted minority voters. The Fraternity Movement went further — equating the SIR exercise to a covert attempt at implementing the National Register of Citizens (NRC). In a post on Instagram, they said:

“Stop the ploy to implement the NRC under a new name—withdraw the decision to re-examine the voter list in Bihar!”

They claimed the exercise demanded proof of citizenship (for voters and their parents), especially targeting those whose names had been added after 2003. In their view, it was “not a simple investigation — it is a conspiracy to implement the NRC secretly and covertly.” They argued this was part of a larger Hindutva agenda, aimed at linking citizenship with religion and caste.

However, the SIR concluded with the removal of many fake voters, and according to available information, no valid citizen — including Muslims — lost their voting rights.

Understood — Sweetheart. Here is the expanded, humanized rewrite of Part 2, following your instructions carefully. I have kept every quoted statement exactly as given, preserved all facts and figures, used simple, clear English, and elaborated so the text is longer and more natural.

Pro-Palestine Activism by Fraternity Movement

Along with other student organisations tied to the collective known as the “Campaign Against State Repression” (CASR), the Fraternity Movement has frequently held pro-Palestine protests across India. In a social media post this June, the Movement accused India of betraying Palestine. They claimed that India decided to “vote against” the resolution demanding a ceasefire in Gaza at the UN General Assembly. The group described this action as a “silent endorsement of the genocidal violence unleashed by the fascist Israeli regime.”

But in reality, India did not vote against the ceasefire resolution — it abstained. Instead of acknowledging that nuance, Fraternity Movement invoked Hindutva — even though neither Hindus nor Hindutva bear direct connection to the conflict. The group wrote:

“This is not an aberration; it is the consequence of a growing ideological alliance between Zionist Israel and Hindutva-driven India. Both are governed by ethno-nationalist regimes, united by an imperialist mindset, an obsession with military surveillance, and a contempt for Muslim life,”

By doing this, they framed international geopolitics in religious-identity terms — essentially tying their domestic political narrative to global conflicts.

Despite this portrayal, the Indian government has consistently maintained historic support for a two-state solution in the Israel–Palestine dispute. India has also provided aid to Palestine. Yet Fraternity Movement cast India’s government as inherently anti-Muslim, arguing the government’s foreign policy reflects a broader ideological bias.

In fact, the group’s loud pro-Palestine stance appears deeply tied to shared religious identity rather than a universal concern for human suffering. Observers note that many within India’s Islamist-leftist circles celebrated when the Palestinian militant group Hamas attacked Israeli civilians on 7 October 2023 — an act widely condemned internationally and viewed as a massacre of innocent civilians.

Support for Rejaz Sydeek after Condemning Operation Sindoor

In May this year, the Indian Armed Forces executed Operation Sindoor, targeting terror establishments in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu & Kashmir. The operation came in response to the Pahalgam attack, in which 26 Hindus were reportedly shot dead by Pakistani jihadis for being Hindus.

In reaction to this, a 26-year-old pro-Maoist student activist from Kerala, Rejaz Sydeek (also referred to as Rejaz M Sheeba Sydeek), condemned the military action on Instagram. He also criticised anti-Naxal operations, and reportedly brandished firearms in a video. On 7 May, he was arrested under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) in Nagpur.

For the Fraternity Movement, Sydeek’s arrest was yet another example, in their view, of the government silencing dissent. They portrayed him as someone exposing “human rights violations” allegedly committed by the government in Naxal-affected regions like Chhattisgarh. They decried the arrest as suppression of free speech and activism.

Given Fraternity Movement’s strong opposition to anti-Naxal operations, it is no surprise they rallied behind Sydeek — describing the crackdown not as law enforcement but as an attack on dissent and human rights.

Defense of a Leader of Banned Islamist-linked Group After Money-Laundering Arrest

In March of this year, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) arrested Moideen Kutty K — also known as MK Faizy — at Delhi’s Indira Gandhi International Airport, under provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA). According to the ED, investigations revealed that the office bearers, members, and cadres of the Popular Front of India (PFI) were allegedly raising and channeling funds within India and abroad — through banking channels, hawala, and donations — to finance and commit terrorist acts across India.

Documents recovered during the investigation reportedly showed that the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI), considered PFI’s political arm, relied heavily on PFI for its everyday operations: from policymaking to selecting candidates for elections, mobilising cadres, and organising public events.

Yet the Fraternity Movement called Faizy’s arrest a “blatant misuse of power,” framing it as “an attack on democratic values and an attempt to silence dissent.” Given that the Fraternity Movement is linked with the Welfare Party of India — headed by individuals with past associations with groups like the banned SIMI, and known for Islamist-leaning activism — their protection of an Islamist-linked leader aligns with their broader political stance.

Backing Controversial Figures: Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid

Consistent with their support for Islamist and anti-state individuals, the Fraternity Movement has also rallied behind Sharjeel Imam, who was arrested on 28 January 2020 during anti-CAA/NRC protests. Sharjeel Imam faced serious charges — including inciting Muslims, instigating riots, and sedition — for what the state considered inflammatory speeches and actions.

But Fraternity Movement’s support extended beyond him. They also backed Umar Khalid, accused of masterminding the 2020 anti-Hindu riots in Delhi. The Movement referred to him as a “political prisoner,” lamenting that he has been jailed for “over a thousand days,” suggesting that his incarceration was unfair.

Contrary to what some supporters claim, media reports have explained that of the 14 adjournments in 2023–2024, 7 were requested by Umar Khalid’s own legal team. Based on these reports, it's clear that the delays were not solely the result of judicial backlog or systemic obstacles, but also due to the legal strategy pursued by his counsel.

Moreover, the former Chief Justice of India, D.Y. Chandrachud, earlier this year cautioned against the practice of “forum shopping” — where lawyers or political groups try to get their cases heard only by certain judges. This context suggests that the repeated adjournments and eventual bail-plea withdrawal in February 2024 reflected strategic legal manoeuvres rather than spontaneous judicial delays.

By backing both Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid, Fraternity Movement aligned itself with figures widely regarded as controversial — indicating a pattern of defending individuals accused of anti-national or extremist activity.

Glorifying Naxal Ideology: Praise for G. N. Saibaba

But the Movement’s support isn’t limited to Islamist-leaning personalities. It also extends to far-left ideologues. In particular, the Fraternity Movement has expressed “revolutionary salutes” to G. N. Saibaba — a former professor in the Department of English at a prominent Delhi college, who was convicted for alleged association with the banned CPI (Maoist) and for waging war against the Indian state. In 2017, a sessions court in Gadchiroli sentenced him to life imprisonment under multiple sections of the UAPA (13, 18, 20, 38 and 39).

Saibaba was first arrested in May 2014 for allegedly providing logistics and recruitment support to Maoist insurgents. Despite poor health, he was granted temporary bail several times — once on 30 June 2015, and again in August 2016, when the Supreme Court granted bail over objections from the Maharashtra government. Critics had warned that freeing him risked enabling propagation of extremist ideology among students.

Yet, even after conviction, Fraternity Movement continues to treat Saibaba as a martyr — praising him as if his punishment under anti-terror laws were unjust. This reveals a clear alignment with extremist and anti-state ideology under the guise of defending rights.

Support for Controversial ‘Activists’ Criticising Ram Mandir and Patriotism

Among the individuals reportedly linked to or supported by the Fraternity Movement are Afreen Fatima and Aysha Renna — activists known for their highly controversial stands.

Afreen Fatima has publicly defended the convicted Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru and repeatedly called for revisiting his verdict. She shared an article in a magazine infamous for sympathising with terrorist viewpoints, urging people to “revisit” the verdict “again and again.” She has also questioned court decisions like the Ram Mandir judgment.

Meanwhile, Aysha Renna has openly backed Sharjeel Imam, calling police action against him a “witch hunt.” She has also demanded that charges against him be dropped — despite his speeches advocating secession and inciting communal tension. Renna has criticised police actions under the UAPA against anti-CAA activists and portrayed the citizenship legislation as denying Muslims their rights — even though the law in question was intended only to fast-track citizenship for persecuted minorities from neighboring countries, and not affect Indian Muslims in any way.

These actions show that Fraternity Movement’s network of sympathizers includes individuals willing to challenge Indian patriotism, judicial verdicts, and mainstream public consensus — often aligning with extremist-leaning narratives under the banner of “activism.”

Backing Controversial Journalist Arrest: The Case of Irfan Mehraj

Fraternity Movement also extended support to Irfan Mehraj — a Kashmiri journalist arrested under UAPA. In a social media post, the Movement claimed that Mehraj’s arrest was an example of the criminalization of journalism.

But official charges revealed a different story: Mehraj was not detained for his writing. He was accused of involvement in a terror-funding case linked to alleged extremist organizations. Investigators claimed he had close associations with Khurram Parvez and was a member of Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Societies (JKCCS) — an NGO that the authorities alleged was used to fund terror activities and promote a secessionist agenda under the guise of human-rights work. In a 2020 Facebook post, Mehraj had publicly praised Parvez, calling him an inspiration.

By defending Mehraj, Fraternity Movement once again aligned itself with individuals accused of extremist links — framing legal action against them as suppression of dissent.

Final Thoughts

From opposing the construction of the Ayodhya temple, to glorifying Naxal leaders; from supporting Islamist-linked activists to defending individuals accused of terror-related crimes — the Fraternity Movement’s public activism paints a very different picture from its stated mission of “democracy, social justice and fraternity.”

Behind the rhetoric of social justice and rights, the Movement appears to consistently side with individuals and causes accused of anti-national, extremist or divisive activity. In doing so, it challenges the core values of democracy, equality, and justice — ironically under the banner of defending them.