An Indian-origin writer and professor, Nitasha Kaul, residing in the UK, found herself at the center of controversy after being denied entry into India upon her arrival at Bengaluru airport. Kaul, who hails from the Kashmiri Pandit community, claimed that she was deported to the UK without any explanation by immigration officials, despite having valid documents and an invitation from the Karnataka government.
The incident unfolded when Kaul landed in Bengaluru to attend an event for which she had been invited by the Karnataka government. Expressing her dismay on social media platform X, Kaul revealed that she received no prior notice or information regarding the denial of entry. She stated that immigration officials provided no justification for their actions, citing only orders from Delhi as the reason for her deportation.
In her posts on X, Kaul shared images of the official invitation extended to her by the Karnataka government and other conference-related communications, emphasizing the legitimacy of her visit. She criticized the lack of transparency in the deportation process, highlighting the disconnect between the Karnataka government’s invitation and the decision taken at the central level.
The situation escalated when the Karnataka BJP labeled Kaul as an “anti-India element” and accused her of being a “Pakistani sympathizer.” The BJP alleged that the Congress-led state government was promoting divisive agendas by inviting Kaul to the event. They claimed that Kaul’s writings and past criticisms of the RSS indicated her anti-India stance.
Responding to the BJP’s accusations, Kaul reiterated her commitment to democratic and constitutional values, emphasizing her academic pursuits and dedication to promoting dialogue and understanding. She expressed disappointment at being targeted and labeled without justification, asserting her right to freedom of expression and dissent.
The incident has sparked debates regarding freedom of speech and expression in India, with concerns raised about the politicization of academic discourse and the stifling of dissenting voices. As the controversy unfolds, questions linger about the role of security agencies and the extent of political influence in immigration decisions, underscoring broader issues of civil liberties and democratic principles.
Sources By Agencies
