The Industry of Permanent Suspicion
In modern politics, accusation is a strategy.
The Sukanya allegations illustrate how a claim evolves in stages: anonymous post, viral circulation, political amplification, courtroom test, judicial dismissal — and then digital resurrection every few years.
It is a cycle.
The objective is rarely conviction. The objective is corrosion.
Stack multiple allegations together — rape, cover-up, media suppression, foreign links, shadowy meetings — and even if none withstand judicial scrutiny, the volume creates a psychological impact. Something must be wrong, the public is nudged to think. Smoke implies fire.
This is political layering — overwhelm with accusation so that rebuttal becomes exhausting.
And here lies the danger.
If courts dismiss a petition and impose penalties, but digital ecosystems continue to treat the allegation as open truth, then two parallel realities emerge: one legal, one viral.
The viral version travels faster.
This phenomenon is not limited to one party. Today the target may be Rahul Gandhi. Tomorrow it may be another leader. The method is transferable, the template reusable.
Mainstream media, often cautious about amplifying unverified criminal allegations, is then accused of complicity. Silence becomes proof of conspiracy. Restraint becomes censorship.
The result? Trust collapses across institutions.
The High Court’s order in this matter was severe. The CBI’s response was formal. The accused denied the charges under oath before the Supreme Court. There exists no judicial verdict establishing criminal wrongdoing in this episode.
Yet politically, the allegation resurfaces with predictable timing.
Why?
Because in the digital era, reputational damage does not require conviction. It requires virality.
Democracy depends on scrutiny. It does not survive on reckless repetition. If every election cycle resurrects dismissed claims as fresh scandal, we shift from accountability to ambush.
The deeper question is uncomfortable but essential:
Do we believe courts matter? Or do we believe trending hashtags matter more?
If legal findings can be ignored whenever politically inconvenient, then no public figure — regardless of ideology — is protected by due process.
And once due process loses relevance, democracy becomes theatre.
The Sukanya episode is not merely about one allegation. It is about a structural transformation in political combat. We now live in an era where accusation is ammunition, doubt is strategy, and legal truth competes with viral myth.
The tragedy is not that allegations are made. The tragedy is that dismissal no longer settles them.
Until we restore the idea that courts — not comment sections — determine guilt, the industry of permanent suspicion will thrive.
And in that industry, truth is always the first casualty.
