How a Dalit Worker Was Lynched in ‘God’s Own Country’
The Killing in Kerala Shows How Hate Becomes Normal and Justice Loses Force
December 23, 2025
A Dalit migrant worker named Ram Narayan was lynched in Palakkad, Kerala, by a group of men who accused him of theft and claimed he was an “illegal immigrant” from Bangladesh. The killing shows that even in Kerala, often seen as resistant to radical Hindu nationalist politics, some people now feel entitled to act on hate and deliver “punishment” without due process. It also shows that for a section of the public, the state no longer holds exclusive authority over justice.
Narayan had moved from Chhattisgarh to Kerala looking for work. He was working as a daily wage labourer in Valayar, as reported by The Hindu. Local men accused him of stealing and claimed he had entered the country illegally. They caught him, beat him in front of others, and left him with fatal injuries. Bystanders recorded the assault and shared the footage widely.
Leaders from several political parties responded. The Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan called the killing an aberration and set up a Special Investigation Team to handle the case. Ministers visited Narayan’s family and promised compensation.
The ruling Communist Party of India (Marxist), or CPI(M), said the accused had links to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and called the violence ideological. The Opposition condemned the incident. The Opposition also condemned the killing. The Communist Party of India (CPI), which is part of the ruling Left Democratic Front, criticised the CPI(M) for avoiding a clear position on far-right violence.
Political attention turned to whether this incident marked a breakdown or a distortion of Kerala’s public life.
The incident is troubling because the men who killed Narayan acted openly. They used violence in front of witnesses, allowed it to be filmed, and made no attempt to conceal their identity. In political theory, the state is defined by its monopoly on lawful force. Once private citizens begin to exercise that force, the law begins to lose its authority. The killing, therefore, shows that enforcement no longer produces enough fear or respect to prevent such acts. Law stops working if it is no longer seen as the only way to punish wrongdoing.
The people who attacked him acted as if they were correcting a wrong. They believed they were morally right. Their belief shows the rise of an alternate moral world, one where certainty replaces doubt, and instant punishment replaces legal procedure.
Sociological studies suggest that this kind of violence is shaped by structural inequality. Narayan was Dalit, poor, and a migrant. These identities placed him at the margins of society and made him more vulnerable in “God’s Own Country,” as Karala is often called. The claims of theft and illegal entry followed a known pattern. People seen as different or weak are often turned into threats. These narratives are part of everyday talk, rumour and shared prejudice. They wait in the background and can be activated at any time.
Ideas driven by hate grow through repetition and approval. Political speech, media content and public language tell people who belongs and who should be removed. With time, this repetition reshapes public attitudes. Some groups come to be seen not as people, but as problems. These changes are deliberate.
Psychological research shows that crowds reduce a person’s sense of personal responsibility. In groups, people are more likely to act violently if others around them seem to approve or join in. This tendency becomes more dangerous when public narratives already mark some groups as threats. In that setting, the decision to act becomes easier. People convince themselves they are doing what is needed and what others support.
Kerala is often seen as a state with stronger institutions and a more plural social culture. But this killing shows that no place is immune to hate. The forces behind lynching are adaptable. They adjust to local conditions, drawing strength from what people ignore, repeat without question, or fail to confront. Assuming immunity does not prevent violence, it only delays the clarity needed to confront it.
What is needed now is a clear and uncompromising legal and political response that reaffirms the rule of law. This means swift prosecution of those involved, public recognition of the role that hate played in the killing, and political leadership that directly names and rejects the ideologies that encourage such violence. Without this, public trust in legal justice will erode further, and the idea that anyone can be punished by a mob will continue to gain ground.
You have just read a News Briefing by Newsreel Asia, written to cut through the noise and present a single story for the day that matters to you. Certain briefings, based on media reports, seek to keep readers informed about events across India, others offer a perspective rooted in humanitarian concerns and some provide our own exclusive reporting. We encourage you to read the News Briefing each day. Our objective is to help you become not just an informed citizen, but an engaged and responsible one.
