Varanasi: Former Bareilly City Magistrate Alankar Agnihotri on Sunday announced a nationwide agitation against the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, declaring that protests would begin in Delhi from February 7 if the law is not withdrawn by the central government by February 6. The announcement was made shortly after Agnihotri met Shankaracharya Swami Avimukteshwaranand at Vidya Math, Kedarg hat, during the latter’s visit to Varanasi.
Addressing the media after receiving the Shankaracharya’s blessings, Agnihotri said that the meeting was not part of any political strategy but a “fortunate coincidence” that allowed a broader discussion on prevailing social and administrative conditions in the country. He emphasized that the interaction was rooted in concerns over social justice, governance, and what he described as the increasing misuse of certain laws and regulations.
Meeting with Shankaracharya and Personal Connection to Kashi
Agnihotri explained that the meeting with Swami Avimukteshwaranand took place when the Shankaracharya arrived in Kashi. He added that although the Shankaracharya had earlier invited him to Prayagraj, he could not attend due to time constraints. The opportunity to meet in Varanasi, he said, held emotional significance for him as he had studied at IIT-BHU and therefore shared a deep personal connection with the city.
According to Agnihotri, the discussion during the meeting revolved around social harmony, administrative pressures, and the perceived imbalance in the application of laws related to caste-based issues. He reiterated that the Shankaracharya’s blessings should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political agenda.
Strong Opposition to SC/ST Act
Launching a sharp attack on the SC/ST Act, Agnihotri described the legislation, enacted in 1989, as “the biggest black law in the country.” He alleged that nearly 95 percent of the cases registered under the Act are false and claimed that its misuse has led to widespread mental, social, and economic harassment of a large section of society.
He argued that while the intention behind the Act may have been to protect marginalized communities, its alleged misuse has created fear and resentment, particularly among government officials and professionals. Agnihotri claimed that the law, in its present form, has become an instrument of coercion rather than justice.
Ultimatum to the Central Government
Agnihotri issued a firm ultimatum to the central government, stating that February 6 would be the final deadline for withdrawing the SC/ST Act. If the government fails to do so, he warned, a mass agitation would begin in Delhi from February 7.
Using strong language, Agnihotri said that if the Act is not scrapped by the deadline, the central government would be “uprooted” and “put on a chartered plane and sent back to Gujarat.” His remarks were widely noted for their aggressive tone and drew immediate attention in political and administrative circles.
UGC Regulations Criticized by Agnihotri
Apart from the SC/ST Act, Agnihotri also criticized the now-stayed University Grants Commission (UGC) Regulations, 2026. Although acknowledging that the Supreme Court has put a stay on the new guidelines, he maintained that the larger issue of alleged institutional misuse of caste-related provisions in education remains unresolved.
Referring to the Supreme Court’s decision on January 29 to stay the UGC regulations, Agnihotri said that provisions related to caste-based discrimination are increasingly being misused at an institutional level. He warned that such practices could have serious long-term social consequences and could even lead to internal unrest if left unaddressed.
In an earlier statement to news agency ANI, Agnihotri had said that caste-based discrimination should never be used as an institutional weapon and should instead be addressed through appropriate language, dialogue, and legal safeguards.
Clarification on State vs Centre Dispute
When questioned about why his criticism was now directed primarily at the central government rather than the state government, Agnihotri clarified that his fight was never against the state administration. He said the core of his opposition has always been the policies framed and enforced by the central government.
He alleged that the central leadership, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah, was attempting to destabilize the state government through discriminatory practices. According to him, the state administration is functioning under immense pressure due to what he described as political and financial constraints imposed by the Centre.
Allegations of Financial Discrimination
Agnihotri further alleged that efforts were being made to divert the state’s funds to Gujarat, claiming that this was part of a broader strategy to weaken the state government. While he did not provide specific evidence to support this claim, he insisted that administrative functioning in the state has been severely affected due to these pressures.
Resignation and Rising Public Profile
Agnihotri has remained in the public eye since resigning from his post amid controversy during the Magh Mela in Prayagraj. The controversy was linked to the Shankaracharya’s holy dip, during which Agnihotri claimed that symbols of Sanatan culture were disrespected.
Explaining his decision to resign, he said that he could not tolerate what he perceived as an insult to religious and cultural traditions. “When I saw symbols of Sanatan culture being insulted, I chose to step down,” he said.
Since his resignation, Agnihotri has increasingly positioned himself as a vocal critic of existing administrative and legal frameworks, particularly those related to caste-based legislation and education policy.
Agnihotri’s statements have sparked debate across political, legal, and social circles. While supporters argue that his concerns highlight genuine issues of misuse and administrative fear, critics have cautioned against the sweeping nature of his claims, particularly regarding the percentage of allegedly false cases under the SC/ST Act.
Legal experts note that the SC/ST Act has been repeatedly upheld by the Supreme Court as a necessary protective measure for historically marginalized communities, though the judiciary has also acknowledged concerns over misuse and has issued safeguards in the past.
