Legal pluralism refers to the idea that there are multiple laws or legal systems in any geographical territory bounded by the traditional borders of a nation state. In the past few decades, it has gained a lot of traction as an analytical technique and a normative concept in Europe and even beyond. It has gained prominence not only in European Union law, but also in private international law, European human rights legislation, public international law and the analysis of legal systems. India is recognised as a pioneer in establishing a constitutional framework that recognises group-differentiated rights. The paper seeks to explore how well has this worked in the context of Indian democracy, given the reality of exclusions resulting from stratification, heterogeneity, and hierarchy, which often act concurrently and generate intersectionality. For decades following independence, our thinking was defined by a pluralist perspective of nationalism and Indianness that reflected the widest possible circle of inclusivity and a "salad bowl" approach. In recent years, a new perspective known as 'purifying exclusivism' has tended to infiltrate and dominate the political and cultural environment. Growing jingoistic tendencies threatens to eliminate any dissent, no matter how minor.