Anjel Chakma’s murder isn’t just one murder

We are not Chinese… we are Indians.” These were Anjel Chakma’s last words before he was stabbed on December 9 in Dehradun. They were a plea for recognition that the 24-year-old from Tripura was no less Indian than his assailants. Chakma succumbed to his injuries on December 26, months away from graduating, months away from his dream of working with the French multinational company that had reportedly offered him his first job. The arrests that followed, and the protests that have erupted in Tripura and elsewhere, carry grief and fury.

For decades, citizens from the Northeast have, all too often, been made to feel exoticised and othered. Racialised abuse has followed them into classrooms, rented apartments, marketplaces and thoroughfares, even erupting in violence. Chakma’s death joins a grim ledger of such fatalities, including the murder of 20-year-old Nido Taniam from Arunachal Pradesh in the Capital in 2014. Earlier, in 2012, following ethnic clashes in Assam, there was an exodus of people from the Northeast from cities such as Bengaluru, Hyderabad, Chennai and Pune, spurred by the mass circulation of inflammatory messages. Over the past decade or so, in a culture of impunity, hyper-nationalist rhetoric that flattens diversity and the absence of meaningful legal deterrence — the recommendations of the Bezbaruah Committee set up after Taniam’s murder remain largely unimplemented — have combined to make old prejudices more strident.

In the aftermath of Chakma’s death, Tripura CM Manik Saha reached out to Uttarakhand CM Pushkar Dhami seeking justice. But what the murder demands is both accountability in the courtroom and honesty in the public square. It calls for a deeper societal reckoning with what it means to belong in a diverse nation, to be sensitive to the complexities of identity. Instead of reducing pluralism to mere lip service, it must be fostered actively — taught early, reinforced often — in schools, universities and workplaces. In acknowledging the tragedy of Chakma’s death, the nation must confront wider complicities in the conditions that led to it.

Overall Analysis

The editorial treats Anjel Chakma’s killing not as an isolated crime but as a symptom of deep-rooted social prejudice against people from India’s Northeast. It opens with Chakma’s last words — “We are not Chinese… we are Indians” — a powerful and emotionally charged quotation that immediately frames the issue as one of belonging, identity, and recognition. By foregrounding this plea, the author appeals to the reader’s conscience before moving into analysis.

The language then shifts to grief and indictment. Chakma’s personal story — his youth, education, and professional aspirations — humanises the victim and underscores the sense of loss. The editorial deliberately contrasts an individual’s promise with the brutality of the act, highlighting how racialised violence cuts short not just lives but futures.

In the middle section, the piece broadens its scope, situating the murder within a long history of discrimination faced by Northeastern citizens. Terms such as “exoticised,” “othered,” and “racialised abuse” point to systemic bias rather than sporadic hostility. By referencing earlier incidents — the murder of Nido Taniam, the 2012 exodus from major cities, and the failure to implement the Bezbaruah Committee’s recommendations — the author builds a cumulative argument that prejudice has been normalised and enabled by institutional neglect and impunity.

The final paragraph adopts a moral and civic tone. While acknowledging official responses, the editorial stresses that justice cannot be limited to arrests alone. It calls for “honesty in the public square” and a broader societal reckoning with pluralism and identity. The language becomes instructive and reflective, urging active efforts in education and public life to foster inclusion. The closing line firmly places responsibility not just on individuals but on society at large, suggesting shared complicity in allowing such conditions to persist.

Important Vocabulary (5)

1. Exoticised – portrayed as strange or foreign in a way that marginalises.
2. Othered – treated as fundamentally different or excluded from the mainstream.
3. Impurity / Impunity – exemption from punishment or consequences (here, impunity).
4. Deterrence – prevention of wrongdoing through fear of consequences.
5. Pluralism – the coexistence and acceptance of diverse cultures and identities.

Conclusion & Tone

The editorial concludes that Anjel Chakma’s murder is not merely a criminal act but a reflection of entrenched societal prejudice and institutional failure. It urges both legal accountability and collective introspection, calling for sustained efforts to nurture inclusivity in a diverse nation.

Tone: Mournful, critical, and morally urgent, with a strong appeal to conscience and collective responsibility.