A photo taken at a wedding in Thrissur, featuring Kerala Chief Secretary Dr. Sarada Muraleedharan as the chief guest, has sparked widespread discussion. But the reason isn't the attire, the elegance of the event, or the stature of the guests. It’s the comments beneath the photo—remarks like "Karivilakku" (black lamp), "Nilavilakku" (traditional lamp), and "Karutha Vav" (dark beauty) that have drawn attention.
Such comments, targeting solely her skin tone, are not just personal attacks; they reflect deep-rooted societal prejudices. We often claim that society has progressed, that we are evolving—but when a woman holding a high-ranking position becomes the target of public ridicule based solely on her skin colour, it reveals the flaws in the very foundation of our so-called progress.
Sarada Muraleedharan's response was not just to a personal insult. It was a broader commentary on the disgrace society still harbours against skin tone, revealing entrenched power structures and discriminatory perspectives.
From a constitutional standpoint, this issue touches the right to life, mental well-being, and personal dignity. Article 14 of the Indian Constitution ensures equality before the law for every citizen. Article 15 prohibits discrimination based on religion, caste, sex, or place of birth. While "skin colour" isn't explicitly mentioned, its link to caste and racial discrimination makes it applicable under this scope.
Furthermore, Article 21 guarantees the right to life with human dignity. Publicly insulting someone based on skin colour is a direct violation of this right.
This is also a matter under criminal law. Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (Indian Penal Code) deals with defamation, punishable by up to two years’ imprisonment or community service. Remarks that damage someone's respect and reputation can be prosecuted. Section 352 addresses intentional insult, also punishable with two years' imprisonment and fines.
Additionally, Section 67 of the IT Act makes the circulation of obscene, racially offensive, or defamatory content through digital platforms legally punishable. If these comments involve caste-based slurs or references, the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act may also apply. If colour is being used as a basis for collective social humiliation, the law enforces strict action.
Therefore, such comments shouldn't simply disappear via Facebook notifications—they must be challenged through court rulings. What Sarada Muraleedharan posted was not just a personal grievance, but a reflection of the political, cultural, and ethical state of our society. The response must go beyond symbolic support—it should be rooted in legal accountability.
Her colour is political. And it’s time our society learns the legitimacy of that truth.
