The Hindu Editorial Analysis- 4th August 2025 | Current Affairs & Hindu Analysis: Daily, Weekly & Monthly - UPSC PDF Download

An Unravelling

 Why in News? 

 The Malegaon blast in 2008 was a tragic incident that occurred during the holy month of Ramzan, resulting in the loss of innocent lives. Initially, the investigation pointed towards Hindutva extremists, revealing deep political and communal divisions in India. The case has since evolved, reflecting a broader struggle for justice, accountability, and the rule of law. 

 In this article, we will explore the details of the Malegaon blast, the subsequent investigations, and the implications of the recent acquittals. 

 The Malegaon blast: A Terrorist Attack 

•  The 2008 Malegaon blast was a terrorist attack that took place during Ramzan, resulting in the deaths of six people and injuring 95 others. 
•  Initially, the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) suspected Hindutva extremists, believing the attack was a retaliatory act mimicking Islamist terrorist tactics. 
•  Evidence collected by the ATS included covert meeting transcripts and a confession by Aseemanand, a Sangh Parivar activist. 
•  The case was politically sensitive from the beginning due to its potential impact on communal relations. 

 ATS Investigation and Shift in Approach 

•  The ATS's investigation was crucial, especially after the wrongful implication and acquittal of Muslim youths in the 2006 Malegaon blasts. 
•  Initially, the ATS aimed to break the stereotype linking terrorism solely with one religion. 
•  However, this neutrality diminished over time, particularly as Hindutva-aligned political forces gained power. 
•  The case was eventually transferred to the National Investigation Agency (NIA), which faced allegations of being pressured to soften its approach towards the accused. 
•  In 2018, a Special Court ordered a full trial, resisting attempts to dilute the case. 

 Final Acquittal and Implications 

•  After 17 years, all accused individuals, including Lt. Col. Prasad Purohit and Pragya Singh Thakur, were acquitted. 
•  The verdict raised concerns about investigative failures, prosecution shortcomings, and political influence undermining justice.
•  Instead of disproving right-wing extremism, the judgment highlighted the inadequacy of the legal processes involved. 

 Evidentiary Collapse and Legal Shortcomings 

•  The court found that the case was based on unreliable evidence, with key witnesses turning hostile and alleging coercion by the ATS, a claim echoed by the NIA. 
•  Electronic transcripts were rejected due to procedural failures in ensuring their authenticity, and Purohit's claim of infiltrating the group as a military intelligence officer was dismissed. 
•  However, he was acquitted due to insufficient legal proof. 

 Communal Reframing and Political Capital 

•  The narrative surrounding the accused shifted from criminal accountability to communal justification. 
•  In 2019, Pragya Singh Thakur, still under trial, was fielded by the BJP and elected from Bhopal, symbolizing political endorsement of her alleged extremist links. 
•  Her praise for Nathuram Godse, Mahatma Gandhi’s assassin, further highlighted the mainstreaming of extremist ideology within political circles. 

 Conclusion 

 The Malegaon blast verdict serves as a stark reminder of the potential failures of justice when institutions act without impartiality. It emphasizes the importance of upholding the principle that terrorism has no religion and the need for institutional integrity in addressing all forms of extremism. The case highlights the dangers of politicized investigations and prosecutorial lapses, underscoring the necessity for a fair and unbiased legal process in the pursuit of justice. 

The ‘Right to Repair’ Must Include the ‘Right to Remember’

Why is it News?

 As India progresses in AI and digital systems, it is crucial to align these advancements with the practicalities of repair and the tradition of frugal innovation. 

•  In May 2025, the Indian government took a significant step towards sustainable electronics by approving a report that recommends the introduction of a Repairability Index for mobile phones and appliances. This index aims to assess products based on their repairability, availability of spare parts, and software support. Additionally, updated e-waste regulations now require minimum payments to encourage formal recycling.
• As India moves towards recognizing repair as a consumer right, it is essential to acknowledge it as a cultural and intellectual asset. Repair is a form of practical knowledge that needs preservation and support.
• While India’s digital and AI policies focus on innovation, data, and efficiency, they often overlook the informal repair and maintenance economy, which is the invisible backbone of daily life. The traditional repair ecosystem is under threat due to unrepairable product designs, consumer trends towards disposability, and exclusion from training schemes and policy focus.
•  What is at stake is not just livelihood loss but the disappearance of a vast, undocumented knowledge system that has long supported India’s technological self-reliance and circular economy. As the nation embraces digital innovation, it is crucial to integrate and protect the informal repair sector as a vital part of its sustainable and inclusive development strategy. 

Why Tacit Knowledge is Important

Right to Repair: Global

• The European Union has implemented regulations requiring companies to provide spare parts and repair manuals to consumers.

Right to Repair: India

• India’s Consumer Affairs Department initiated a Right to Repair policy in 2022 and launched a portal in 2023 covering electronics, cars, and farm equipment.

Global Sustainability Push

• The United Nations' Sustainable Development Goal 12 (SDG 12) promotes repair as a means to support sustainable consumption and production patterns.

India’s Opportunity

• India has the potential to lead by recognizing repair not merely as a service but as valuable knowledge work that warrants support and respect.

The Blind Spot in India’s Digital Policy

• India’s E-waste Status: In 2021–22, India produced over 1.6 million tonnes of e-waste, making it the third-largest generator globally.
• E-Waste Rules, 2022: These rules introduced Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), requiring manufacturers to manage their products even after consumers discard them.
• Neglect of Repair in Policy: The E-waste rules primarily focus on recycling, with minimal attention to repair as a means to reduce waste.
• Skilling Gaps: Government schemes like the Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana (PMKVY) offer short-term training for factory roles, but repair work requires creativity and problem-solving skills that are not easily addressed in formal training.
• Education Policy Oversight: The National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 mentions traditional knowledge and hands-on learning but does not specify how to support local repair skills or pass them on.
• Mission LiFE and Repair Culture: Initiatives like Mission LiFE promote eco-friendly habits like repair and reuse but rarely support the actual workers involved in repair activities.
• Policy-Workforce Disconnect: While circular economy concepts are gaining traction in India’s policy landscape, the informal repair sector is often overlooked, despite being central to sustainability efforts.
• Rise of ‘Unmaking’ Concept: The emerging concept of "unmaking" involves disassembling, repairing, or reusing products to identify flaws and improve future designs.
• Learning from Repair: Broken items offer valuable lessons; for instance, a faulty phone part can help someone reconnect to essential functions, and a damaged circuit board can serve as a learning tool.
• Repair is Central, Not Marginal: Informal repairers play a crucial role in extending the life of goods, supporting a genuine circular economy where repair is integral to a product’s lifecycle.
• Need for Recognition: By acknowledging repair workers as vital contributors to environmental innovation, India can excel in both sustainability and digital inclusion.

AI-enabled Solutions for Repair Justice

• India’s Repair Culture is Old and Resilient: India has a long-standing tradition of creative problem-solving and frugality, known as jugaad, which predates the current tech-driven policies. Repairers have been adapting to evolving technologies for years, often without formal recognition or support.
• Tech Progress vs. Ground Reality: While India is making strides in AI infrastructure and digital public goods, these initiatives need to align with the practical challenges faced by repair workers in the field.
• Modern Gadgets: Hard to Repair: Many contemporary devices are designed for compactness and control, making them difficult to repair. A 2023 report by iFixit found that only 23% of smartphones sold in Asia are easily repairable due to their tight, non-modular designs.
• Need for Repair-Friendly Design: To achieve true sustainability in technology, it is essential to consider the entire product lifecycle, including breakdown, repair, and reuse, not just production and usage.
• Designing for “Unmaking”: Products should be designed with repair and disassembly in mind from the outset. This principle should guide the development of hardware standards and AI-integrated systems.

Institutional Actions Needed

• Ministry of Electronics & IT: Should incorporate repairability standards into AI policies and government procurement guidelines.
• Department of Consumer Affairs: Can broaden the Right to Repair framework to include additional product categories and encourage community involvement.
• Ministry of Labour & Employment (via e-Shram): Can officially acknowledge informal repair workers and connect them to social security benefits and training opportunities.
• Ministry of Skill Development & Entrepreneurship: Should develop training programs that reflect the hands-on and intuitive nature of repair work, rather than adhering to industrial skill templates.

Tools for Preserving Repair Knowledge

• Decision Trees: Can assist in documenting common repair procedures in a simple and structured manner.
• Large Language Models (LLMs): Can be utilized to capture, summarize, and disseminate local repair knowledge in multiple languages without losing context or creativity.

Conclusion

Supporting the informal repair ecosystem is not just about technical performance or intellectual property; it involves recognizing the skilled labor that underpins our digital and physical infrastructure. This is a crucial step towards a fair and repair-friendly technological future. As the philosopher Michael Polanyi noted, “We know more than we can tell.” By valuing what cannot be digitized, we honor the human expertise that gives technology its true meaning and purpose.