Reports indicate that on December 18, 2025, the Surat District and Sessions Court approved the Gujarat government’s decision to withdraw the sedition case against BJP MLA Hardik Patel. This follows a similar move in March, where the Ahmedabad Sessions Court sanctioned the withdrawal of another case against him. In both instances, Hardik and four of his associates were granted a clean slate.
These cases date back to 2015, when Hardik Patel led the Patidar reservation movement—not as a seasoned politician, but as a citizen activist. The Surat case specifically involved allegations that he incited Patel youths to attack the police rather than commit suicide. It was a charge that carried a potential sentence ranging from three years to life imprisonment. Now, that legal threat has simply vanished.
A Political Masterstroke or Legal Mockery?
Why did the Gujarat government suddenly lose its appetite for prosecution? In Gujarat, the "government" is widely understood to be synonymous with Narendra Modi and Amit Shah; folk wisdom suggests not a leaf stirs in the state administration without their nod.
The reason for this sudden leniency is transparent: Hardik Patel is now in the BJP. In 2019, he joined the Congress and rose to the rank of Working President. Yet, he eventually defected to the very party whose leader, Amit Shah, he had once famously branded "General Dyer." One can only assume that the looming fear of a prison sentence prompted a political bargain: "Join the BJP, and the cases disappear."
The Erosion of Equality
This isn't just about Hardik Patel; it is a fundamental question of the rule of law and our judicial integrity. If Hardik Patel never committed sedition, why was he charged in the first place? If he did, why was the case withdrawn before the court could reach a verdict? The answer is simple: between 2015 and 2022, he was an opponent, so the cases remained. Today, he is a member of the fold, so the cases are gone.
This is a textbook example of discriminatory governance. When a government operates on the principle that "one of our own can do no wrong," it violates the very essence of democracy and the Fundamental Rights to equality enshrined in Articles 14 and 15 of the Indian Constitution. But such principles are currently being "sent to the oil mills" (ignored). In a regime where one man acts as the ultimate arbiter, "General Dyer" decides who deserves the rain of mercy and who deserves the heat of the law.
A Tale of Two Leaders
Contrast this with the case of Jignesh Mevani.
In 2022, a BJP worker in Kokrajhar, Assam, filed a case against Mevani. The Assam Police rushed to Palanpur, Gujarat, and whisked him away overnight, forcing him to endure the grueling legal cycles of a distant state. Did that BJP worker act alone, or was the "General Dyer" spirit at work there too?
Unlike Hardik, Jignesh chose not to trade his principles for a BJP membership to escape his legal woes. For Jignesh, individual liberty and dissent are paramount; for Hardik, the "benevolence" of the powerful is his shield.
The Question of Legacy
Hardik Patel is my friend; Jignesh Mevani was my student. Both are now MLAs—one from the BJP, one from the Congress. Ask yourselves: Which one should I be proud of?
More importantly, set aside my personal pride and ask: Should we not be deeply concerned about the blatant destruction of our democratic fabric?
---
*Senior academic based in Ahmedabad
Comments