A major storm is brewing on social media involving Lakhshya Lakey, a prominent self-described Ambedkarite and anti-caste activist, and Tulip Sharma, a criminal lawyer and Instagram content creator. What began as a debate over cultural history has rapidly spiraled into a legal battle. Sharma has officially filed a cyber complaint against Lakey, accusing him of targeted harassment, sending derogatory messages, and directing caste-based abuse toward the Brahmin community.

Lakhshya Lakey is not an obscure figure; he is a graduate of the prestigious IIM Indore and has stood on the TEDx stage as a speaker. He commands a significant digital footprint, operating the “Lakhshya Speaks” brand across various platforms, including an Instagram page with approximately 553,000 followers and a YouTube channel with over 14,000 subscribers.

A Dispute Over Dance and Tradition

The friction started on February 11th, when Lakey posted a video claiming that the classical dance form Bharatnatyam was "appropriated" by Brahmins. He argued that the dance is a form of "Brahminical cultural appropriation," asserting that the original form was actually Sadir Attam or Dasi Attam, performed by Devadasis. Lakey further alleged that Rukmini Devi, a Tamil Brahmin woman, removed the "sexual or erotic" elements of the dance to "whitewash" it, effectively distancing the modern Bharatnatyam from its original cultural roots.

Tulip Sharma challenged this narrative in the comments section, questioning the logic of his criticism. She wrote: “As per your logic, the “Brahmin” woman Rukmini Devi ended the cycle of sexual exploitation of those dev dasis. Where’s the problem now? On one hand, you see this as an oppressive system and then if someone reformed it, you have a problem with that just because the reformer happens to be a “Brahmin.” LOL. Gain some clarity in life and don’t rely on WhatsApp knowledge.”

Allegations of Direct Harassment and Objectification

According to Sharma, Lakey failed to provide a factual rebuttal to her points. Instead, she claims he moved the conversation to private direct messages (DMs) where he allegedly resorted to personal attacks and casteist slurs. On February 12th, Sharma uploaded a video to her handle, @_tulipsharma, to "expose" the influencer.

“Let us expose a social media influencer called the ‘Lakhshya Speaks’. This man is known to spread hate towards the Brahmin community on the internet, and I have no problem with that since you have your freedom to expression, and if you spread hate, then it’s not a new thing on the net. But the problem arises when you can’t take dissenting opinions. He is the kind of influencer who will dm you and will speak rubbish if you try to post a dissenting comment on his post,” Sharma stated.

The lawyer shared screenshots and screen recordings to support her claims. She noted that while the debate was about dance history, Lakey allegedly began boasting about his dating history to win the argument. “The topic was not even about Brahmin girls but Lakhshya Lakey went on to flex about all of his exes being Brahmins, using the girls of a specific community to win an argument. The topic about the entire community shows how big of a casteist he is,” Sharma said.

She further alleged that Lakey claimed to be "annihilating" caste by fathering "intercaste babies." According to her video: “His entire profession is grounded on hurling abuses to Brahmins and then he goes on to flex about his Brahmin exes. He even went on further to say he is annihilating caste by making intercaste babies.”

The controversy deepened when other followers came forward. In response to a female follower of Sharma who criticized his behavior, Lakey reportedly sent a highly vulgar message: “Brahmin gf sucks me off, problem?” This stands in stark contrast to his public claims in one of his videos where he stated he was not “brave enough to date outside his SC/ST community.”

Additional screenshots shared publicly show Lakey allegedly telling Sharma, “Holy chopped, you’re ugly for a Brahmin girl,” and comparing her unfavorably to his past partners, stating, “My girlfriend is way prettier than you. You don’t even look like you have a boyfriend,” and “4 Brahmin exes, all prettier than you.”

In light of these events, Sharma has notified her followers that she has initiated legal action under the IT Act and relevant sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).

The Defense: Claims of Falsification

In the face of mounting public criticism, Lakhshya Lakey has denied the allegations. He maintains that the screenshots shared by Sharma are "fake" and part of a "bogus case" designed to silence him. In a follow-up video, Lakey compared his situation to that of the late student activist Rohith Vemula, suggesting that similar tactics were being used against him.

However, observers have pointed out the irony in this comparison, as a recent closure report by the Telangana Police indicated that Vemula did not actually belong to the Scheduled Caste (SC) group, a fact that complicates Lakey’s narrative of shared caste-based persecution.

A Pattern of Controversial Rhetoric

This incident is part of a broader history of provocative statements made by Lakey. He has frequently targeted Brahmin traditions, such as vegetarianism. He once claimed that India's concept of "pure vegetarianism" is a tool for caste superiority.

“Only in India do you find the idea of a ‘pure vegetarian. Because here vegetarianism is not just about animals. It is about purity, superiority, and caste. It is about saying, “I am closer to God, and you Dalits who eat meat are lesser.” That Brahmanical gaze even appears when some vegans look at Dalit activists and shame them for not being vegan,” he argued. Critics point out that "pure vegetarian" is usually a dietary label indicating a strict lack of meat or eggs, rather than a theological claim of superiority.

Lakey has also waded into historical debates. In a July 2025 podcast, he claimed that Brahmins refused to crown Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj due to his caste. Historical records, however, suggest that the invitation of Gagabhatt from Banaras was due to his expertise in specific Vedic coronation rites (Aindreya Rajabhishek) rather than a refusal based on bias.

Furthermore, Lakey has used his platform to encourage political shifts, such as urging the Yadav community to abandon Hinduism. In one post, he wrote: “And Yadavs, despite their political power and claims of Kshatriyata, are still not accepted as equals by Thakurs or Brahmins. No intermarriage. No respect. Only graded inequality. To my Yadav brothers and sisters – don’t aspire to be part of this caste pyramid.”

Political Alignments and Criticism of the Judiciary

Lakey has also been a vocal supporter of Umar Khalid, who was accused in the 2020 Delhi Riots case. He has often compared Khalid’s incarceration to Kanhaiya Kumar’s political success, attributing the difference to religion.

“Two student leaders. Same campus. Similar accusations. But two very different fates. Kanhaiya Kumar walks free, joins mainstream politics. Umar Khalid, a Muslim, has spent 5 years in jail without bail. This is not a coincidence. This is the price of being a Muslim in India,” Lakey posted.

Despite Lakey’s framing of Khalid’s situation as "religious persecution," reports have shown that Khalid’s own legal team sought seven out of fourteen adjournments in recent years. Former Chief Justice of India, DY Chandrachud, has previously commented on the "mindset" of certain legal teams seeking specific benches, which often leads to delays in such high-profile cases.

Finally, the controversy has touched on the sensitive issue of the Kashmiri Hindu genocide. Screenshots shared by users appear to show Lakey mocking the tragedy. In one instance, he allegedly replied to a comment saying, “Kashmir Brahmano ka yehi halat tha” (This was the condition of Kashmiri Brahmins), and in another, “Mujhe kuch nahi hoga, unlike your Kashmiri Pandit brethren.” (Nothing will happen to me, unlike your Kashmiri Pandit brethren).

As the legal proceedings move forward, the case continues to ignite intense debate over the boundaries between activism, free speech, and targeted harassment in the digital age.