The Constitution promises equality before the law.
Yet two recent incidents in Varanasi have left many Indians asking whether that promise is being applied consistently.
Case One: The Iftar Gathering
In March, 14 Muslim men were arrested after an iftar gathering on a boat in the Ganga became controversial. A complaint alleged that non-vegetarian food was consumed and waste was thrown into the river, hurting religious sentiments and polluting the Ganga.
Police registered multiple criminal charges, including provisions related to religious sentiments and environmental laws. The accused remained in jail for several weeks before eventually obtaining bail from the Allahabad High Court.
Case Two: Chicken and Beer on the Ganga
Months later, another viral video showed five Hindu men allegedly cooking chicken and consuming beer on a boat in the Ganga.
Police also registered a case and arrested them. However, they obtained bail much sooner.
This comparison immediately spread across social media.
The Question Citizens Are Asking
The question is not whether either group should be above the law.
If anyone pollutes a river, the law should act.
The real question is why two incidents that many people see as broadly similar appear to have followed different legal paths.
Legal experts note that the two cases involved different sections of law, which can affect bail procedures.
That is a valid legal explanation.
But it does not erase the public perception that similar conduct produced different outcomes.
In a democracy, public confidence matters.
When people see two cases and believe different standards are being applied, authorities should explain the reasons clearly and transparently.
A River Is a River
Our opinion is simple.
The Ganga should be protected because it is a river, not because different groups attach different religious meanings to it.
Whether the accused are Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Sikh, atheist, or anyone else should make absolutely no difference.
If someone pollutes a river, environmental law should apply equally.
Justice should not depend on identity.
It should depend on evidence, facts, and equal application of the law.
That is what the Constitution promises.
That is what every Indian deserves.
