The arrest and one-day police remand of 21-year-old self-styled Hindutva influencer Swatantra Bhardwaj have raised questions about the network of influence behind his actions and the people who may be backing him.
“He is actually the hammer, but the hand which is wielding the hammer is another one,” lawyer and political analyst Ayushman Pandey said on The Federal’s Capital Beat show.
‘Targeted actions’
Explaining how targeted actions are allegedly used to send messages to critics and social activists, Pandey said influencers such as Bhardwaj were merely tools, while the larger role was played by the RSS and the BJP.
“The hand is Kapil Mishra, the hand is eventually RSS and Modi and Amit Shah and all these people. Those are the hand, and he is one amongst maybe 8-9 crore youth. The population of youth in India is in excess of 70 crores, but they have these 8-9 crore youth in their ranks,” he said.
Also read: Swatantra Bhardwaj case: Does 72-hour deadline suggest a perfunctory probe?
Pandey also questioned the meaning of the phrase “dharma rakshit rakshati rakshitah” used by Bhardwaj. “When he says that, what does he mean actually? He says that whatever they are doing is above the law,” Pandey said.
The controversy
The remarks come against the backdrop of official invitations extended to Bhardwaj for major national events. These include an invitation to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s swearing-in ceremony on June 9, 2024, and another to the official Independence Day celebrations in 2026.
Critics have cited these invitations, along with photographs of Bhardwaj with political leaders, to question his proximity to the BJP and the confidence with which he has acted. Union Minister Chirag Paswan, however, has distanced himself from the accused and filed a complaint over claims of a close association.
The Patiala House Court order, passed by Additional Sessions Judge Saurabh Pratap Singh Laler, followed allegations that Bhardwaj severely injured 38-year-old Sanjay Azad during a protest at Jantar Mantar on June 23. Azad was reportedly present at the protest with his daughter.
The Delhi Police initially registered a case at the Parliament Street police station under Sections 115(2) and 126(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), relating to causing hurt and wrongful restraint.
Bhardwaj’s arrest
Following a demonstration by the Cockroach Janata Party outside the police station, additional charges were invoked under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
Also read: Activist’s claim of ‘cracking skull’ at CJP protest sparks Oppn attack on Delhi Police
Bhardwaj’s arrest subsequently triggered counter-protests outside the police station by various Hindutva groups supporting him. In a public statement, Bhardwaj maintained that his actions were in self-defence.
The developments have since widened the debate beyond the alleged assault, raising questions about the role of political networks, social-media influencers and organised groups in targeting critics and activists.
Legal proceedings
Addressing the nature of the ideology involved, Delhi University professor Apoorvanand stated, “You can see in Swatantra Bhardwaj the true face of Hindutva politics, which is actually gundaism.” He noted that such politics attempts to present itself through refined language while aiming to subjugate minority populations and control the broader public.
Prof. Apoorvanand further highlighted the impact of political mobilisation on youth over the past decade, warning that it has fostered widespread lumpenisation across regions. He observed that, “So now you have scores and hundreds of Swatantra Bhardwaj across India who call themselves influencers and monetise this violence.”
Also read: Delhi Police detain activist Swatantra Bhardwaj after CJP protest
Explaining the internal political contradictions, Prof. Apoorvanand emphasised that the ruling party’s electoral strength depends on various communities while its ideological core remains distinct. He remarked: “If the BJP respects Baba Saheb Ambedkar, how can BJP supporters in the same breath defend Manusmriti?” He added that law enforcement flexibility under public pressure remains a critical concern.
Public accountability
Legal representation for Bhardwaj argued before the court that the detention was politically motivated and marked by delayed procedural enhancements. The defence counsel had stated that “In a two-month-old case, the manner in which sections were added and an arrest was made under political influence after bail is extremely unfortunate.”
Responding to the legal defence, Congress spokesperson Sujata Paul emphasised that accountability extends beyond a single arrest to the underlying system of impunity. “First of all, this is the arrest of only one man, and the ideology of impunity is still roaming around free,” she noted.
Sujata Paul pointed out that public mobilisation from youth organisations and political groups forced law enforcement to take formal legal action. She stated, “Because the way the youngsters are protesting, the way the youth is articulating itself and smashing this entire narrative, they cannot handle this, and therefore the police is also on the backfoot.”
Institutional challenges
Regarding the long-term political trajectory and handling of such figures, Prof. Apoorvanand observed that historical precedents show fringe actors being temporarily sidelined before being reintegrated. He stated, “Hindutva politics cannot jettison him. It can put him aside for a while, but he is the face of Hindutva politics.”
Sujata Paul asserted that sustained public vigilance remains necessary to ensure that legal proceedings move forward without political interference. “We have to be vigilant now, we have to be forceful, and they will not be able to carry on what they have been doing till now,” she added.
Meanwhile, Ayushman Pandey highlighted the core conflict between established governance frameworks and vigilante actions, stating, “They create tools to hammer a system which is based on rule of law. Their enemy is rule of law.”