The Raja Raghuvanshi murder case has sent shockwaves across the country. While more and more disturbing details of the horrific saga of betrayal are emerging, the usual suspects have found a way to insert their anti-Hindu agenda even in a case devoid of any caste or religious angle. In this vein, The Print published an op-ed authored by Amana Begum Ansari, titled: “Question nobody’s asking on Meghalaya murder: Why is inter-caste love a rebellion in India?”
In this article, Amana bashed the Indian right-wing social media and their supposed anti-feminist views. She then proceeded to blame reservations in the traditional Hindu society about inter-caste marriages for Raja and Sonam’s alleged forced marriage which ultimately led to Raja’s brutal murder.
“While details are still emerging in the Meghalaya honeymoon murder case, current reports suggest that the bride couldn’t marry the man of her choice—perhaps because Sonam is a Raghuvanshi, and Raj, her family’s employee, belongs to the Kushwaha community. This begs a crucial question: Why is choice, and inter-caste love, still a rebellion in India?” ThePrint article reads.
Amana Begum Ansari further argues that this “tragedy” could have been averted if Sonam Raghuvanshi was not denied her choice marrying a person of her choice instead of the one chosen by her family.
“Could this tragedy have been averted had choice not been denied? Yes, the accused are criminals if proven guilty, and murder couldn’t have been the only solution to their problem. But at the same time, they were, like many others, cornered by a system of traditions that allows no escape within its own logic. And unless we’re willing to talk about that system, we’ll just keep seeing more of the same,” Ansari writes.
While several media reports have claimed that accused Sonam Raghuvanshi and Raj Kushwaha were in a relationship and that the duo along with other accused persons plotted Raja Raghuvanshi’s murder in Meghalaya, the family of Sonam and Raj have said that the duo were brother-sister and not involved romantically.
Sonam Raghuvanshi’s brother Govind told the media that Raj Kushwaha used to get Rakhi tied around his wrist from Sonam in his presence. Govind also said that Raj used to call Sonam “Didi” (term used in Hindi for elder sister). Accused Raj Kushwaha’s mother and his sisters have also said the same.
#WATCH | Indore, Madhya Pradesh | Raja Raghuvanshi murder case: Mother of accused Raj Kushwaha says, "My son is not like that, he can never do something like this. He is very young and used to take care of his three sisters after his father passed away. He started working at… pic.twitter.com/TmCyxKhYlK
— ANI (@ANI) June 11, 2025
“Raj was just our employee. He was working in our office for two-three years. He used to manage the office and handle clients,” Govind added.
Based on the facts that have emerged so far, it does not seem like Raj Kushwaha was Sonam’s boyfriend, rather the duo shared a brother-sister-like relationship. Thus, there is no question of an ‘upper-caste’ Sonam Raghuvanshi being denied her choice to marry a man who belongs to Kushwaha community, who come OBC category. Perhaps, Amana needs to understand that marrying sister is not a normal in Hindu community, as it is in her community.
The only question that ThePrint columnist should focus on is why does she has to rake up ‘inter-caste rebellion’ angle in the Raja Raghuvanshi murder case when it is not even clear properly yet as to who is Sonam’s boyfriend. Even if it is assumed that Raj and Sonam indeed wanted to get married, it is highly likely that Sonam’s family may have not been fine with she marrying younger boy with much less income, whose family are not financially of the same level as the Raghuvanshi family.
Since Raj and his family had good relations with Sonam’s family, so much so that Sonam tied Rakhi to Raj, as claimed by Sonam’s brother and Raj’s mother, the ‘caste’ angle ThePrint columnist is trying to rake up does not make much sense.
ThePrint columnist is solely blaming caste and ignoring stark socio-economic realities and is insinuating that had there been no opposition to inter-caste marriage, Sonam would have not been forced to succumb family pressure to marry Raja, then conspire to kill her husband while on honeymoon, and could have married Raj Kushwaha instead.
This, however, is not the first time that Amana Ansari demonstrated her prejudice against Hindus. In January this year, she penned an article for ThePrint wherein she argued that Hindu rights groups like Bajrang Dal and those opposed to Christian missionaries converting Dalits and tribals to Christianity by offering financial inducements should focus on the social and economic assimilation and upliftment of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, ensuring dignity, equality, and opportunities within their existing faith and society. She, however, failed to explain why Dalits who convert to Christianity demand Scheduled Caste (SC) status, if obtaining dignity, attaining freedom from caste discrimination they supposedly faced earlier as Hindu Dalits was the point of conversion.
