With Rajesh Soni behind bars for allegedly “morale-breaking” posts about Operation Sindoor, India may be entering a phase where online speech is monitored more aggressively than ever. His arrest under the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita provisions sends a message: tread carefully when talking about military operations or national security online.
The incident is not isolated—it fits a broader trend of silencing dissent by conflating criticism with anti-nationalism. From journalists booked for tweets to students suspended for slogans, India’s digital space is tightening.
Soni’s posts questioned the excessive glorification of political leadership over the military. While some might consider them poorly timed or provocative, they were not inciting violence or hatred. The decision to arrest a political leader based on such posts, especially under serious charges like endangering sovereignty, may be disproportionate and indicative of state overreach.
What makes the arrest more alarming is the lack of nuance in public and media discourse. Instead of discussing whether Soni had a legitimate point—albeit expressed controversially—the conversation has shifted to loyalty tests. Are you with the soldiers or against them?
This false binary is dangerous. In a democracy, citizens must be able to question their government’s choices, even in times of conflict. If every critique is treated as sedition, what remains of open debate?
As social media becomes the new public square, cases like Soni’s may trigger a chilling effect. Ordinary citizens may think twice before expressing political opinions, especially those that challenge dominant narratives. This self-censorship, fostered by fear, is far more insidious than any overt clampdown.