When the Snow Remembered: Kunan Poshpora, Thirty Five Years On

Listen to our podcast for this episode on Spotify. bit.ly/3OGOUC0 Video Explainer

The Lead

35 Years On | Kunan Poshpora, Rape as a Political Weapon and India’s Continuing Accountability Question

On the night of 23 February 1991, in the twin villages of Kunan and Poshpora in Kupwara district of Jammu and Kashmir, women alleged that soldiers of the Indian Army carried out mass rape during a cordon and search operation. The Army denied the allegations. Official inquiries later described the claims as unsubstantiated. Survivors insisted that the assaults occurred and that justice was obstructed.

Thirty five years later, Kunan Poshpora is not merely a disputed episode from the height of the Kashmir insurgency. It has become a reference point in debates on militarisation, institutional credibility and the recognition of rape as a political weapon. The case forces an uncomfortable question: can extraordinary powers exercised in the name of national security coexist with meaningful accountability when grave human rights violations are alleged?

The anniversary also arrives in a contemporary India where sexual violence remains a structural crisis. Recent national crime data for 2023, released by the National Crime Records Bureau in 2024, recorded over 31,000 registered rape cases across the country, translating to an average of more than 85 cases reported each day. The rape rate stood at roughly 4.4 per 100,000 population. These are reported cases. Experts continue to underline the likelihood of significant under reporting.

Against this backdrop, Kunan Poshpora is not an isolated memory. It is part of a wider conversation about power, vulnerability and the limits of justice in conflict zones.

The Context | How We Got Here

The early 1990s marked one of the most violent phases of militancy in Jammu and Kashmir. Armed insurgency escalated sharply, and the Indian state responded with large scale counter insurgency operations across rural districts. Cordon and search operations were frequent, often conducted at night, and carried out under the framework of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act.

AFSPA grants wide operational authority to armed forces in notified disturbed areas and requires prior sanction from the government before prosecuting personnel for actions taken in the line of duty. Supporters argue that such protection is necessary in hostile environments. Critics contend that it creates structural hurdles to accountability.

On 23 February 1991, one such operation took place in Kunan Poshpora. Villagers later alleged that men were detained separately while women were sexually assaulted through the night. Early medical examinations and testimonies were documented. The Indian Army rejected the allegations as fabricated. A Press Council inquiry later characterised the claims as unsubstantiated.

Over three decades, petitions were filed, reinvestigations were sought and court proceedings unfolded in stages. Yet no resolution has conclusively bridged the divide between official findings and survivor testimony. The case remains suspended between denial and insistence.

The Collective Memory

Within Kashmir, Kunan Poshpora has come to symbolise the anxieties and grievances of the 1990s. Each anniversary prompts statements by civil society groups, academic discussions and renewed calls for accountability.

For survivors, the consequences were deeply personal. Women spoke of stigma, broken marriage prospects and long term social marginalisation. In conservative rural settings, sexual violence often carries enduring reputational consequences for victims rather than perpetrators.

Over time, the episode has moved from private trauma to public memory. Younger generations encounter it through books, court records and activism. Yet memory remains polarised. For some, Kunan Poshpora represents state excess under militarisation. For others, it is viewed as an allegation that was investigated and found wanting. The absence of universally accepted closure has allowed the case to harden into a contested symbol.

Rape as a Political Weapon

Sexual violence in conflict zones is rarely incidental. It functions as intimidation, collective punishment and psychological warfare. By targeting women, perpetrators send a message to entire communities. The objective is not only physical harm but social humiliation and fragmentation.

India’s internal conflicts have seen allegations of sexual violence across different contexts. In Manipur, protests erupted in 2004 after the killing of Thangjam Manorama by personnel of the Assam Rifles, and public outrage again surged in 2023 when videos showed women being stripped and paraded during ethnic violence. In Bastar, Chhattisgarh, Adivasi women have alleged assault during anti Maoist operations, with security forces denying wrongdoing in several instances.

During the 2002 communal violence in Gujarat, sexual brutality against Muslim women formed part of mob attacks, with the Bilkis Bano case becoming emblematic of both atrocity and prolonged legal struggle.

Across these varied settings, the perpetrators differ: insurgents, mobs, paramilitary units or state forces. The political logic of rape, however, remains disturbingly consistent. It seeks to terrorise communities, undermine resistance and assert dominance through gendered humiliation.

Recognising rape as a political weapon does not prejudge individual cases. It situates them within a broader pattern where gendered violence intersects with conflict and power.

The Data | Contemporary Trends

The latest NCRB Crime in India report for 2023, released in 2024, recorded over 31,000 rape cases registered nationwide. The majority of victims knew their accused, underscoring that sexual violence in India is deeply embedded within social and familial structures.

The conviction rate in rape cases has remained in the range of roughly 27 to 28 percent in recent years, reflecting persistent challenges in investigation, forensic support, witness protection and trial delays. Large pendency in courts further complicates timely justice.

Data specific to allegations against security personnel in conflict zones is harder to isolate because such cases often require prior sanction and may not proceed through ordinary criminal registers in the same manner. This structural opacity contributes to mistrust and speculation.

The numbers reveal a sobering reality. Sexual violence is not peripheral to Indian society. In environments marked by armed conflict and concentrated state power, vulnerability may be compounded by fear, stigma and institutional complexity.

The National Question

Kunan Poshpora raises a fundamental constitutional dilemma. How does a democracy ensure that armed forces operating in difficult terrain retain operational effectiveness while also guaranteeing that citizens alleging grave violations have access to impartial justice?

The sanction requirement under AFSPA lies at the heart of this debate. Governments have often defended it as necessary to prevent frivolous prosecution. Human rights advocates argue that the requirement can delay or obstruct accountability, particularly in sensitive cases involving sexual violence.

Democratic legitimacy depends on public confidence in institutions. Where allegations arise, credible, independent investigation is essential. Denial without visible scrutiny risks deepening distrust rather than resolving it.

Between the Lines

Beyond legal procedure lies human cost. Sexual violence fractures families, leaves psychological scars and embeds generational trauma. Survivors frequently confront silence, stigma and social isolation long after headlines fade.

In Kunan Poshpora, the coexistence of official denial and survivor testimony has entrenched polarisation. For some, the case symbolises state impunity. For others, it represents an unproven accusation that unfairly stains the armed forces. The absence of conclusive closure has allowed the episode to become a political emblem rather than a settled judicial outcome.

Such unresolved narratives accumulate in the national imagination, shaping perceptions of justice and belonging.

The Global Lens

International jurisprudence recognises rape in conflict as a war crime and, in certain contexts, a crime against humanity. Global legal standards increasingly emphasise that sexual violence in conflict is often systematic rather than accidental.

Although India’s internal conflicts are legally distinct from international wars, global human rights norms expect states to investigate serious allegations against security forces transparently and impartially. Democratic credibility is shaped not only by security outcomes but by adherence to due process and accountability.

Kunan Poshpora thus resonates beyond Kashmir. It reflects a universal tension between state power and individual dignity.

What Comes Next

Thirty five years on, the way forward lies in institutional strengthening rather than rhetorical repetition. Independent investigative mechanisms insulated from conflicts of interest, time bound decisions on sanction requests and greater transparency in reporting could help bridge trust deficits in future cases.

For survivors, acknowledgement and due process matter alongside verdicts. For the armed forces, transparent inquiry protects institutional integrity by distinguishing verified wrongdoing from unproven allegation.

Security without legitimacy cannot produce durable peace. Justice remains central to reconciliation in conflict affected regions.

Voices | Who Had Said What Then

In 1991, villagers alleged that women across several households were assaulted during the night long search operation. Medical examinations and activist documentation recorded testimonies soon after.

The Indian Army denied the allegations, describing them as false and motivated. A Press Council inquiry characterised the claims as unsubstantiated.

Human rights organisations challenged these findings, arguing that investigations were incomplete and that survivor accounts warranted deeper judicial scrutiny. Over time, activists and scholars framed the episode as emblematic of the broader debate over impunity under AFSPA.

These positions have remained largely unchanged for three decades.

Editor’s Lens | Karvaan’s Spotlight

Kunan Poshpora endures because it exposes a structural tension within democracies confronting insurgency. When extraordinary laws expand state power, accountability mechanisms must expand proportionately. If they do not, suspicion fills the vacuum.

Recent NCRB data, recording over 31,000 rape cases nationwide in 2023 with conviction rates below one third, reveals the scale of India’s ongoing struggle with sexual violence even outside conflict zones. In such a context, allegations emerging from militarised environments demand heightened scrutiny rather than diminished attention. Where power asymmetry is sharp and legal shields exist, the moral obligation to ensure transparency becomes stronger.

Rape as a political weapon operates by attacking dignity to control communities. It destabilises trust not only in perpetrators but in institutions that fail to respond credibly. Whether the accused are insurgents, mobs or state actors, the damage extends beyond individuals to the social fabric itself.

Kunan Poshpora cannot be undone. But its legacy can be addressed. Democracies do not prove strength by reflexive denial or permanent suspicion. They prove it by demonstrating that no allegation of grave violation is beyond independent examination.

The true measure of national security is not merely territorial control or operational success. It is the assurance that even in times of conflict, justice remains accessible, transparent and possible.