The interpretation of mischief can itself be a mischievous act. The plight of M.A.A. Khan, professor and head of the department of political science at Ashoka University, who has been arrested by the police on such charges as endangering India’s sovereignty and integrity, is a case in point. It takes a special kind of prejudice to spot malintent in Mr Khan’s post; in it, the academic had commented on the contrast — hypocrisy — of having Sofiya Qureshi as a spokesperson for Operation Sindoor with the hate-mongering that Indian Muslims are often subjected to under the Bharatiya Janata Party’s watch. Tellingly, a first information report was filed on the basis of a complaint by a BJP Yuva Morcha leader. The administration, as if on cue, launched a pincer attack on the academic. Haryana’s State Commission for Women sent a notice to Mr Khan for allegedly making disparaging comments on women in the armed forces and inciting communal hatred even though the text of Mr Khan’s post makes the absurdity of such allegations quite clear. Even the university that Mr Khan works for has chosen to distance itself from the controversy. It must be pointed out that while Mr Khan has faced the administration’s ire, Vijay Shah, a BJP leader from Madhya Pradesh, who had made a distasteful and patently communal remark against Ms Qureshi, had not been meted out any punishment by the party despite the Supreme Court’s stern condemnation of the incident. This differential treatment — penalising Mr Khan and protecting Mr Shah — exposes the double standards of the BJP. It also signifies the pusillanimity of institutions: a signal from the powers that be is enough to make supposedly autonomous bodies bark. This is the perverse consequence of the politicisation of key institutions in New India.

The chain of events is portentous on another count. This is because it lays bare attempts to demonise dissenting views under the garb of patriotism. This cynical use of the spirit of patriotism to weaken free speech, a kernel of democracy, has been witnessed in other polities under the shadow of totalitarianism. Little wonder then that patriotism’s sharp edges have, over the years, not escaped the notice of thinkers and philosophers. India and Indians will do well to take their wise counsel. Devotion to the country cannot be used as a licence to stifle the voices of countrymen. That would be an unequivocally unpatriotic act.