Shocking truth about India’s emergency: Unveiling darkest chapter of 1975-77

India’s state of emergency, declared on June 25, 1975, and lasting until March 21, 1977, remains one of the most controversial periods in the nation’s history. This 21-month authoritarian regime under then-Prime Minister Indira Gandhi saw the suspension of civil liberties, mass detentions and widespread human rights abuses.

The emergency not only stifled democracy but also left a lasting scar on India’s political landscape. Below are a few of the many shocking violations that defined this dark chapter. The reader will get to know how the emergency reshaped the nation and why its lessons remain relevant today, especially as we mark its 50th anniversary in 2025.

Emergency’s origins: Nation in crisis

The emergency was declared under Article 352 of the Indian Constitution, citing “internal disturbance”, with a pliant president at the then-prime minister's neck and call. Political unrest, economic challenges, and protests demanding Indira Gandhi’s resignation set the stage. A court ruling threatening her political career further escalated tensions, prompting her to invoke emergency powers. This move allowed the government to rule by decree, suspend elections, and curtail fundamental rights, marking the beginning of an unprecedented crackdown.

The term “emergency” became synonymous with authoritarianism, as democratic institutions were sidelined. The 42nd Constitutional Amendment expanded legislative powers and limited judicial oversight, making the emergency immune to legal challenges. For 21 months, India’s democracy was effectively paused, leaving citizens vulnerable to state excesses. 

Mass arrests: Silencing dissent during emergency

One of the most egregious violations during the emergency was the mass detention of over 100,000 individuals without trial. Opposition leaders, including ex-Congress activist Jayaprakash Narayan, Jana Sangh's Atal Bihari Vajpayee—the BJP wasn’t yet formed—and would-be Prime Minister Morarji Desai, were arrested under laws like the Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA). Amnesty International reported 1,40,000 detentions, with 43,000 targeting the Sikh minority.

These arrests weren’t limited to politicians. Journalists, activists and ordinary citizens who dared to dissent faced imprisonment. The emergency’s preventive detention laws allowed authorities to jail people without charges, creating an atmosphere of fear. This systematic silencing of voices underscored the emergency’s assault on freedom of speech and expression.

Press censorship: Gagging fourth estate

The emergency dealt a severe blow to press freedom. All publications required government approval, and electricity was cut to mainstream media houses in Delhi, halting newspaper production. Over 3,000 newspapers were silenced, and more than 250 journalists were arrested.

Films critical of the government, like Aandhi and Kissa Kursi Ka, were banned, further stifling creative expression.

This censorship ensured that the public remained largely unaware of the emergency’s excesses. The government’s control over information created a propaganda-driven narrative, with dissenters labelled as threats to national security. The suppression of the press during the emergency remains a stark reminder of the fragility of free speech in times of crisis.

Forced sterilisation: Brutal population control measure

Perhaps the most infamous aspect of the emergency was the forced sterilisation campaign, led by Sanjay Gandhi, Indira’s son. Aimed at population control, the program saw 8.3 million sterilisations in 1976–1977, a sharp rise from 2.7 million the previous year. Many were coerced, with reports of individuals being pressured through incentives or threats.

Specific cases, like the 800 forced sterilisations in Uttawar village, highlight the campaign’s brutality. International bodies, including the UN and World Bank, raised concerns, but the program continued unabated. The emergency’s sterilisation drive not only violated bodily autonomy but also disproportionately targeted marginalised communities, cementing its legacy as a human rights travesty.

Demolitions and displacement: Uprooting lives

The emergency’s urban renewal programs led to widespread demolitions, displacing hundreds of thousands. In Delhi alone, 1,50,105 structures were razed, affecting 7,00,000 people. Mumbai and Pune saw similar destruction, with 12,000 and 1,285 huts demolished, respectively. These actions, often justified as beautification efforts, uprooted the poor and marginalised, exacerbating social inequalities. 

The Turkman Gate demolition in April 1976 was particularly violent, with hundreds reported killed in clashes with authorities. The emergency’s disregard for the vulnerable highlighted its prioritisation of control over compassion, leaving countless families homeless and destitute.

Torture and extrajudicial killings: Emergency’s violent edge

The emergency wasn’t just about suppression; it was marked by violence. Reports of torture emerged, including the case of P. Rajan, a student killed in custody at the Kakkayam torture camp. Police firings during protests, such as the Muzaffarnagar incident that killed 30 people, underscored the state’s willingness to use lethal force.

These acts of violence created a climate of terror, where dissent could mean death or disappearance. The emergency’s reliance on extrajudicial measures revealed the extent to which the government was willing to go to maintain power, leaving a trail of trauma for survivors and their families.

Emergency’s lasting legacy

The emergency ended in 1977, following public backlash and Indira Gandhi’s electoral defeat. The period spurred significant constitutional changes, such as amending the grounds for declaring an emergency to “internal disturbance” to “armed rebellion” in 1978, aimed at preventing future abuses. Grassroots movements and underground press played a crucial role in restoring democracy, but the emergency’s impact lingered.

The period fostered widespread cynicism about leadership and eroded trust in institutions. Recent discussions on X, especially around the 50th anniversary in 2025, reflect ongoing outrage, with terms like “murder of the republic” capturing public sentiment. The emergency serves as a cautionary tale about the fragility of democracy and the dangers of unchecked power.

Why emergency still resonates today
As we reflect on the emergency 50 years later, its lessons are more relevant than ever. In an age of political polarisation and global democratic challenges, the emergency reminds us of the importance of safeguarding civil liberties. The press censorship and mass detentions highlight the need for a vigilant media and an engaged citizenry.

Moreover, the emergency’s human cost—millions sterilised, thousands displaced, and lives lost—demands that we prioritise human rights, even in times of crisis. By understanding the emergency violations, we can better appreciate the resilience of India’s democracy and the need to protect it from future threats.

Lessons

India’s emergency of 1975–1977 was a stark reminder that democracy is not immune to authoritarianism cannand ot be taken for granted. From mass arrests to forced sterilisations, the human rights abuses during this period reshaped India’s political and social fabric. As we commemorate its 50th anniversary in 2025, the emergency’s legacy challenges us to remain vigilant in protecting democratic values.

The ruling BJP and its supporters are mocking the Indian National Congress today while remembering the dark chapter from contemporary Indian history, saying that the very people who put democracy on suspended animation once upon a time today claim to uphold the Constitution of India.

Constitution and it's Destroyer in one frame.#Emergency1975 pic.twitter.com/GYvFbn4n5e

— Kashmiri Hindu (@BattaKashmiri) June 25, 2025

By remembering the emergency’s dark chapter, we honour those who suffered and ensure that such violations are never repeated. The emergency’s story is one of loss, resilience, and ultimately, a testament to the power of the Indian people’s enduring commitment to democracy. Let’s learn from it and strive for a future where freedom and justice prevail.