To sum up on how CPI(M) evolved it’s understanding about Modi regime which became an effective tool in the hands of Fascistic RSS let us look at the following. This characterisation of the Modi regime based on the party’s public statements, party documents, and broader political strategy:

1. Economic policy critique: Neo-Liberalism vs. Crony Capitalism

• Early Characterisation (2014-2019): Initially, the CPI (M) described the Modi regime as an extension of neo-liberal economic policies that favoured corporate interests over the working class and peasantry. It criticised the government for pursuing privatisation, deregulation, and policies like the National Monetisation Pipeline, which it saw as selling public assets to big business. The emphasis was on the regime’s alignment with global capitalism and its betrayal of the poor.

Further, the CPI (M) characterised the regime as a dangerous blend of neo-liberal economic policies and Hindutva-driven communalism accusing Modi of serving corporate interests—particularly those of crony capitalists—while simultaneously promoting a divisive Hindu nationalist agenda rooted in the ideology of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the BJP’s ideological parent.

Since the 22nd Congress of the Party, this “corporate-communal nexus” was seen as a defining feature, with policies like tax concessions for the wealthy, loan write-offs for big businesses, and the dismantling of labour protections viewed as evidence of a pro-corporate tilt. At the same time, the CPI (M) highlighted incidents like the Gujarat riots of 2002 (under Modi’s watch as Chief Minister) and subsequent communal polarisation as proof of his regime’s anti-minority stance. The CPI(M) also framed Modi’s governance as a betrayal of his 2014 election promises, such as job creation and economic “good times” (achche din). The documents pointed to rising unemployment, agrarian distress, and uncontrolled food prices as failures that disproportionately harmed the working class and peasantry—core constituencies in their ideology.

• Later Emphasis (2019 onwards): While the neo-liberal critique persists, the CPI (M) has increasingly highlighted “crony capitalism” as a defining feature of Modi’s rule. It points to specific instances—like tax concessions for billionaires, loan write-offs for corporate allies, and the concentration of wealth among a tiny elite—as evidence of a regime that serves a select group of capitalists tied to the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). This shift reflects a growing focus on inequality data (e.g., the top 1% owning 40% of wealth) and a more populist framing to mobilise public discontent.

2. Authoritarianism: from subversion of institutions to full-blown fascism

• Initial Framing (2014-2019): In Modi’s first term, the CPI (M) characterised the regime as authoritarian, pointing to the subversion of democratic institutions like Parliament, the judiciary, and the media. It cited examples such as the refusal to engage with Opposition parties, the misuse of agencies like the Enforcement Directorate, and the suppression of dissent (e.g., arrests of activists). In the document the Party released before 2019 general elections titled ‘In Defence of Secular Democratic Constitution’, the Party gave call to defeat the BJP from centre and considered this goal as part of its larger agenda towards advancing peoples struggles to establish People’s Democracy.
• Escalation (Post-2019): After Modi’s re-election and events like the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests –2019-2020-and the 2024 temple inauguration in Ayodhya, the CPI (M) has intensified its rhetoric, at times aligning with broader Left voices that label the regime as “fascist” or “Indian fascism.” While not always using the term explicitly, the party describes a “communal-corporate nexus” and an “authoritarian-repressive regime” that merges state power with Hindutva ideology, drawing parallels to historical fascism tailored to Indian conditions. Almost all the resolutions adopted by CPI (M) Central Committee have thereafter categorised the BJP regime as the one advancing the RSS’s fascist agenda.

In sharp focus, after Modi’s re-election in 2019, the CPI(M)’s characterisation evolved to place greater emphasis on the regime’s authoritarian tendencies and its perceived threat to India’s secular democratic framework. While the corporate-communal critique remained, the party increasingly highlighted the subversion of democratic institutions—such as the misuse of central agencies like the Enforcement Directorate and the Central Bureau of Investigation against Opposition leaders, the weakening of parliamentary norms, and the erosion of federalism.[1] The CPI (M) described Modi’s leadership as displaying “contempt for parliamentary norms” and fostering an “authoritarian-repressive regime.” This shift marked a broader framing of Modi as not just an economic or communal threat, but a systemic danger to the Constitution and India’s pluralistic identity.

3. Communalism: Hindutva as a tool vs. state-sponsored majoritarianism

• Early Perspective (2014-2019): The CPI (M) initially framed Modi’s communal agenda as a political tool of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and the BJP to consolidate power through Hindu majoritarianism. Armed with the 22nd Congress Political Resolution and Political Tactical line the party evolved it’s assessment of the BJP central government with its ideological moorings in the RSS. The CPI (M) has therefore portrayed communalism under Modi as a state-sponsored project, exemplified by the Ayodhya temple event in January 2024, which it called a “death knell of secularism.” The party argued that the regime has moved beyond using Hindutva as a mere electoral strategy to embedding it into governance, violating constitutional principles for example the explicit separation of religion and state.

4. Electoral and tactical shifts: BJP as the main enemy vs. broader Opposition unity

• Consistent position: Throughout Modi’s tenure, the CPI (M) has identified the BJP as the primary political enemy due to its communal and neo-liberal character. It has called for mass struggles to resist these policies, emphasising the Left’s role as the most consistent opponent.
• Tactical variation: However, the CPI (M)’s approach to opposing Modi has varied. In 2014-2019, it focused on independent Left mobilisation, wary of alliances with “neo-liberal” parties like Congress. In its election review of the 2019 general elections CPI (M) without mincing words took the Congress to task for its unwillingness to come up with broader Opposition unity. Subsequently, after the Covid lockdown and the BJP-led government using the lockdown to advance its political goals compelled all Opposition parties to coordination on public issues. This coordination gradually expanded into political actions and culminated in the formation of INDIA block as the Opposition’s unified attempts to unseat the BJP from the centre.

Post-2019, with the formation of the INDIA bloc (a coalition of Opposition parties), the CPI(M) has softened its stance, advocating for a broader unity to defeat the BJP electorally, even while maintaining its critique of Congress’s historical role with regards to neo-liberalism. This reflects a pragmatic shift in characterising Modi as a threat requiring a wider resistance, not just a Left-led one.

5. Response to specific events: Reactive vs. strategic framing

• Reactive Critique: At times, the CPI (M)’s characterization has been event-driven. For instance, it condemned Modi’s handling of the 2002 Gujarat riots (pre-2014) as evidence of his complicity in violence, and later the 2021 oxygen shortage denial as proof of callousness and authoritarian denialism.
• Strategic Framing: Over time, the party has woven these incidents into a broader narrative of a “post-truth” regime that manipulates facts, undermines democracy, and prioritises Hindutva and corporate interests over people’s lives. This shift shows a move from piecemeal criticism to a cohesive ideological attack.

Post-2024 Election: weakened but unchanged in essence

The 2024 Lok Sabha election results, where the BJP lost its outright majority and formed a coalition government under the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), prompted a subtle adjustment in the CPI (M)’s rhetoric. They hailed the outcome as a “setback” for Modi’s “image of invincibility” and a public rejection of his authoritarian-communal agenda. However, the party maintained that the core character of the regime remained unchanged. They argued that despite coalition constraints, Modi’s economic policies would continue to favour  big corporations (e.g., through privatisation initiatives like the National Monetisation Pipeline), and his communal politics would persist, as evidenced by ongoing attacks on minorities in the BJP-ruled states.

The CPI(M) also noted that while Constitutional changes (like those undermining secularism or federalism) might be harder to push through due to the lack of a BJP majority, the regime’s “thrust” toward neo-liberalism and authoritarianism would see “no qualitative change.”

Ideological consistency vs. tactical nuances

Throughout these phases, the CPI (M)’s Marxist lens has remained consistent—viewing the Modi regime as a tool of the bourgeoisie, allied with imperialism and monopoly capital, while exploiting communal divisions to maintain power.

However, tactical differences emerge in how they prioritise these elements. Early on, economic critiques dominated, aligning with their class-based analysis. Later, the focus on authoritarianism and constitutional defence reflected a broader alliance-building strategy within the INDIA bloc, where the CPI (M) sought to unite secular and democratic forces against the BJP. Post-2024, their characterisation balances cautious optimism about electoral setbacks with a warning against underestimating Modi’s resilience.

Key differences over time

Thus, the CPI (M) emphasised Modi’s pro-corporate policies (e.g., labour reforms, tax cuts) as the primary betrayal. Over time, this expanded to include a stronger focus on democratic erosion, reflecting the regime’s growing consolidation of power.

2. Communalism as strategy vs. systemic feature: Early critiques framed communalism as a political tactic to distract from economic failures. Later, it was portrayed as an intrinsic feature of Modi’s governance, tied to a broader Hindutva state-building project.
3. Invincibility vs. vulnerability: Pre-2024, Modi was depicted as an unassailable figure backed by money and media. Post-2024, the CPI (M) highlighted his vulnerability, though without softening their overall condemnation.

Conclusion

The CPI (M)’s characterisation of the Modi regime has evolved from a focus on neo-liberal economics and institutional subversion to a more layered critique that integrates crony capitalism, state-sponsored communalism, and fascist tendencies. While the core Marxist analysis—viewing the state as serving ruling-class interests—remains unchanged, the party has adapted its rhetoric and tactics to address the regime’s growing consolidation of power and the shifting political landscape. These differences reflect both an escalation in the perceived threat posed by Modi and a strategic response to rally the wider Opposition, all while staying rooted in its ideological opposition to capitalism and communalism.

The author, Y Venugopal Reddy, is cultural critic and practicing as advocate at Hyderabad and had contributed a series of articles in the run up to 22^nd Congress of CPI (M) at Hyderabad; the concluding part of this series will appear tomorrow)

[1] The regime’s pursuit of Hindutva politics intensified in this period, with policies like the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), 2019 and the abrogation of Article 370 in Kashmir 9August 2019), both seen as assaults on secularism and minority rights.

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

Part 1 and 2 can be read here

Evolution of CPI(M)’s approach towards Hindutva Politics: A Reading of its own documents – Part 1

Evolution of CPI(M)’s approach towards Hindutva Politics: A Reading of its own documents – Part 2

Related:

Subjective thinking Hazardous for the CPI(M), India

CPI(M) must read the writing on the wall, realign to defeat fascist forces

Steer Clear from Jargon, Look at the Ground Reality: CPI(M) Today

The post Evolution of the Left [CPI (M)] approach towards Hindutva politics: A Reading of its own documents – Part 3 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Beed police swiftly arrested two suspects, Vijay Rama Gavhane (aged 22) and Sriram Ashok Sagde (aged 24), both residents of the village, and detained two others for questioning. The officials believe the accused planted gelatin sticks inside the mosque, leading to the explosion. The suspects, engaged in well-digging work, allegedly diverted the explosives from their professional use to orchestrate the attack.

According to locals, tensions escalated on Saturday night during the ‘Sandal’ procession at the village dargah, a traditional event that draws participants from surrounding areas. An altercation broke out between Vijay Rama Gavhane, Sriram Ashok Sagde, and a group of Muslim youths. As per the report of Hindustan Times, the FIR states that communal slurs were exchanged, and Gavhane allegedly threatened, “Why is a mosque being built here? Destroy it, or else we will.”

The Mecca Masjid, where the blast occurred, is located close to the dargah Gavhane referred to. After the argument, villagers intervened, and the groups dispersed for the night. However, at approximately 2:30 am, Rashid Sayyad, the complainant in the case, was woken by the sound of an explosion. According to the FIR, several villagers then witnessed Gavhane and Sagde fleeing the scene.

STORY | Gelatin sticks trigger blast at mosque in Beed, no casualty; 2 held

READ: https://t.co/Q8IHnhWlpm

VIDEO:
(Source: Third Party) pic.twitter.com/6xevUV5bp1

— Press Trust of India (@PTI_News) March 30, 2025

Arrests and investigation

A case has been registered at Talwada police station under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including those related to desecrating a place of worship, inciting communal discord, and illegal possession of explosives. Sections such as 298 (destruction, damage, or defilement of a place of worship or sacred object), 299 (deliberate and malicious acts that insult the religious beliefs of any group of people), 196 (actions or speech that promote enmity or hatred between groups), 326(g) (Mischief by injury, inundation, fire or explosive substance), 351(2) (criminal intimidation), 352 (intentional insults that incite a breach of peace), 61(2) (criminal conspiracy), 3(5) (joint criminal liability) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) have been used. Additional charges sections 3 (explosion likely to endanger life or property), 4 (making/keeping explosives with intent to endanger life or property), and 5 (making or possessing explosives under suspicious circumstances) of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, have also been invoked. As per a report of Free Press Journal, forensic experts and bomb disposal teams have collected evidence, and the investigation continues to determine whether the attack was premeditated or part of a larger conspiracy.

The mosque caretaker, Sayyad Shammu, had spoken to media and confirmed that the accused had issued threats the previous day. The blast triggered outrage within the local Muslim community, leading to protests outside the Talwada police station demanding strict action against the perpetrators. In response, police imposed heightened security measures to prevent further unrest. Shops in the village remained closed in protest, but community leaders urged calm, emphasising the need for justice through legal channels.

Background of the accused

One of the arrested individuals, Vijay Rama Gavhane, lived near the mosque and had prior criminal records, including a case involving illegal arms possession. Police investigations have revealed that Gavhane, who had failed his Class X exams, worked as a well-digger in the village. His job involved using controlled explosions, making him familiar with handling gelatin sticks. A senior police officer confirmed that the accused misused their knowledge of explosives to carry out the attack.

Despite the village’s history of communal harmony, his actions suggest a pattern of radicalisation and extremist tendencies. Authorities are investigating whether external influences played a role in the attack. A now-deleted Instagram reel posted by Gavhane has also raised suspicions. In the video, he can be seen smoking in front of a bundle of gelatin sticks while a Marathi song played in the background, with lyrics translating to: “One should stay within limits. I am not less. I am the fire.” This revelation has intensified concerns that the attack was deliberate and ideologically motivated.

महाराष्ट्र के बीड की एक मस्जिद में बम ब्लास्ट हुआ

ब्लास्ट विजय और श्रीराम ने किया

ब्लास्ट करने से पहले विजय ने ये वीडियो इंस्टाग्राम पर शेयर किया था

एक हाथ में बम है, दूसरे हाथ में सिगरेट

यह ख़ौफ़ है क़ानून व्यवस्था और पुलिस का महाराष्ट्र में?

लानत है देवेंद्र फड़नवीस pic.twitter.com/ciG3qkmsGb

— Supriya Shrinate (@SupriyaShrinate) March 30, 2025

Systemic failures and the need for accountability

Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, speaking in Nagpur during an event attended by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, acknowledged the blast and assured that the perpetrators would be brought to justice. Commenting on the explosion at the mosque in Beed, Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis stated, as quoted by ANI, “The information has been received, and we also know who was responsible. The concerned SP will provide further details.”

Beed Superintendent of Police Navneet Kanwat and Special Inspector General of Police Virendra Mishra visited the site to oversee the investigation and security arrangements. Local political leaders, including MLA Vijaysingh Pandit, appealed for peace, urging residents to let law enforcement conduct a thorough inquiry. However, the incident has raised larger questions about the increasing prevalence of communal attacks and the state’s ability to curb hate-driven violence.

This incident is not an isolated case but part of a troubling pattern of targeted attacks against religious minorities. The ease with which the accused accessed and used explosives points to glaring lapses in regulatory oversight. Additionally, the reluctance of authorities to categorise the incident as terrorism despite its clear intent to instil fear reflects a dangerous double standard in law enforcement.

While arrests have been made, the broader concern remains: will justice be served, or will this case fade into obscurity like other instances of anti-Muslim violence? The legal system must ensure that those responsible face the full extent of the law to prevent such acts from becoming more frequent.

The Beed mosque blast is a stark reminder that communal violence continues to threaten India’s social fabric. The government must move beyond routine arrests and conduct a thorough investigation into the motivations, networks, and ideological leanings that fuel such attacks. Without decisive action and systemic reform, impunity will only embolden further violence, deepening societal divisions and endangering the nation’s fragile communal harmony.

A tradition of shared festivities

Despite the attack on the mosque, local residents highlighted the long-standing tradition of celebrating festivals together in the village. According to a villager quoted by PTI, during the Gudi Padwa festival, Hindus customarily visit the Hazrat Sayyad Badshah Dargah near the mosque. The accused allegedly attempted to destroy the mosque using gelatin sticks just as preparations were underway for joint celebrations of Gudi Padwa and Ramzan Eid on Sunday.

Following the explosion, residents—who have coexisted peacefully for decades—came together to repair the mosque. A peace committee meeting was also convened in the village on Sunday morning to maintain communal harmony.

Political leaders condemn the attack

Samajwadi Party MLA Abu Asim Azmi squarely blamed the prevailing anti-Muslim rhetoric in political discourse for incidents like the Beed mosque blast. “Politicians are spewing venom against Muslims day in and day out,” Azmi remarked, criticising ministers for using inflammatory language. He further questioned why the accused were charged with minor offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Indian Evidence Act (IEA), rather than being booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), a law frequently applied to Muslim activists and organisations. “Are they not terrorists? Will they face bulldozer justice? Will they be forced to compensate for the mosque’s destruction?” he asked, highlighting the apparent legal double standard, as per Scroll.

Asaduddin Owaisi, Member of Parliament and president of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen (AIMIM), also condemned the attack, expressing concern that one of the accused had openly boasted about his role in the blast without fear of consequences. In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Owaisi pointed out that the accused seemed confident of being treated as a hero rather than a criminal, which speaks to the larger environment of impunity for anti-Muslim violence.

In Beed Maharashtra, on 29th March, 2:30 AM a masjid was targeted in a blast by Vijay Gavhane and Shriram Sagde. Vijay had even posted a video of himself with gelatine sticks. It’s clear that he’s confident of being treated as a hero. The masjid suffered grave damage and the…

— Asaduddin Owaisi (@asadowaisi) March 30, 2025

Beed MLA Sandeep Kshirsagar of the NCP (Sharad Pawar faction) and Georai MLA Vijaysingh Pandit visited the damaged mosque and urged residents to remain calm. Kshirsagar condemned the attack but offered no substantial critique of the government’s response.

Maharashtra Congress chief Harshvardhan Sapkal took a more direct stance, alleging that the blast was not an isolated incident but part of the ruling MahaYuti alliance’s broader agenda to incite communal violence. “Maharashtra, a state known for its progressive ethos, is being dragged into a crisis of communalism,” Sapkal stated, as per the Deccan Herald. He accused the BJP-led MahaYuti government of deliberately fostering unrest, employing a “divide-and-rule” strategy reminiscent of British colonial policies. “The ruling alliance wants to keep Maharashtra in a state of turmoil, and the Beed mosque blast fits into that larger motive,” he asserted. Sapkal also raised concerns about the deteriorating law and order situation under Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, who also serves as the state’s home minister.

Accusation of selective justice

Legal experts have strongly criticised the state’s reluctance to invoke UAPA in this particular case, a law frequently used in terrorism-related cases. Supreme Court lawyer Javed Shaikh, speaking to the Free Press Journal, stated that the Beed explosion was an act of terrorism, making it a “clear-cut case” for UAPA charges. “In the past, the government has slapped UAPA charges on activists from the Popular Front of India (PFI) merely for participating in rallies. Here, we have an actual explosion inside a mosque, yet the state is hesitant to invoke UAPA. This selective application of anti-terror laws raises serious concerns about bias in law enforcement,” Shaikh argued.

Advocate A.K. Pathan questioned whether the authorities would conduct a thorough investigation into a possible larger conspiracy behind the attack. “There are forces working in the background to disrupt communal harmony. Will the state government ensure an impartial inquiry, or will it shield the perpetrators under political pressure?” he asked, as per FPJ.

The Beed mosque blast has reignited debates on how anti-terror laws are applied in India. While Muslim activists, students, and organisations have often faced UAPA charges for lesser offences, the state’s reluctance to use the same law against those accused of attacking a place of worship exposes a stark inconsistency. The demand for an NIA or ATS investigation is growing, with many questioning whether the government will ensure justice or allow the perpetrators to escape with minimal consequences.

The Beed Incident: A microcosm of Maharashtra’s escalating communal tensions

As per a report of the Hindustan Times, Maharashtra has witnessed a staggering 823 incidents of communal unrest since the beginning of 2024, reflecting a sharp escalation in religious tensions. According to state officials, communal violence has erupted across multiple districts, including Nagpur, Nandurbar, Pune (Rural), Ratnagiri, Sangli, Beed, and Satara. Many of these incidents have been linked to orchestrated campaigns by right-wing organisations demanding the demolition of Mughal emperor Aurangzeb’s tomb in Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, alongside the circulation of distorted narratives on social media designed to provoke unrest.

Statistics paint a grim picture of the deteriorating communal climate in Maharashtra. Since January, 4,836 communal crimes involving Hindu-Muslim tensions have been recorded, including 170 cognisable and 3,106 non-cognisable cases. Of particular concern are 371 incidents related to religious insults, underscoring how targeted provocations are being used to stoke sectarian divisions.

In the first three months of 2024 alone, authorities registered 156 criminal cases in January, 99 in February, and 78 by mid-March in connection with communal unrest. 102 of these cases were deemed cognisable—meaning they involved serious offences requiring immediate police action. Despite these alarming numbers, there has been little political will to curb hate-driven mobilisation, allowing tensions to fester.

One must also remember the recent incident of communal violence that took place in in central Nagpur on March 17, when mobs went on a rampage following a protest organised by Bajrang Dal and Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP). These groups were demanding the removal of Aurangzeb’s tomb, which they labelled a “symbol of pain and slavery.” The protest quickly turned into large-scale violence, with authorities identifying rumour-mongering and inflammatory content on social media as key triggers.

As per a report of Hindustan Times, Maharashtra Cyber Cell flagged 144 online posts across Facebook, Instagram, X (formerly Twitter), and YouTube that contained inflammatory content linked to the riots. Despite efforts to curb the spread of incitement—only 37 links were removed, while action was taken against 107—this digital hate machinery continues to fuel unrest.

The HT report further provides that incident of communal unrest has not been confined to traditionally sensitive areas. Even Maharashtra’s Konkan region, historically known for Hindu-Muslim harmony, has been shaken. In Rajapur, Ratnagiri, communal tensions flared when members of a Holi procession allegedly danced in front of Jama Masjid’s gate, damaging the structure while chanting religious slogans.

Right-wing narratives on social media immediately twisted the incident, falsely claiming that the mosque had been attacked, further escalating tensions. This pattern of provocation—using festivals as a pretext for targeted disruptions—has become alarmingly frequent.

Despite this, state officials continue to downplay the gravity of such incidents, insisting that Hindu-Muslim unity remains strong in Konkan and that such events are mere “aberrations.” However, this argument ignores a larger, deliberate trend—where once-peaceful areas are increasingly becoming sites of engineered communal flashpoints.

The Role of the State: Complicit or ineffective?

The recurring nature of these incidents across multiple districts points to a systemic failure—or worse, complicity—on the part of the state government. The selective application of the law is glaring. While harsh measures like UAPA have been used against Muslim activists for peaceful demonstrations, those openly instigating communal violence—whether on the streets or via digital platforms—continue to evade serious legal consequences.

Moreover, the administration’s failure to pre-emptively intervene despite clear warning signs—such as the circulation of incendiary social media content and mobilisations by right-wing groups—suggests a deliberate lack of political will. The growing normalisation of communal violence in Maharashtra underlines a dangerous shift: the state is no longer simply a passive observer but appears to be enabling and, in some cases, even facilitating these tensions.

The explosion at a mosque in Beed district of Maharashtra serves as yet another stark reminder of the escalating communal unrest across the state, following a troubling trend that has been unfolding since the beginning of the year. The Beed blast, which occurred amidst preparations for the joint celebration of Gudi Padwa and Ramzan Eid, is a culmination of rising religious tensions, exacerbated by right-wing propaganda and incendiary rhetoric from political figures.

This event mirrors broader patterns of communal violence seen in districts like Nagpur, Ratnagiri, and Satara, where attacks on religious sites and institutions have become disturbingly frequent. The explosion at Beed, allegedly orchestrated by local perpetrators using gelatin sticks, was intended to disrupt communal harmony during one of the most significant religious periods for both Hindus and Muslims. What makes the Beed attack particularly concerning is that it was preceded by a scuffle during a religious procession the previous night, which, according to locals, involved hate speech and threats of violence against the mosque.

Related:

India’s Censorship Hypocrisy: Ban on Santosh and promotion of Chhaava

Unnao’s Mohammad Sharif Killing: A tale of grief, injustice, and systemic bias

Who is Mumbai for? Students and Mumbaikars ponder the question

The post Gelatin blast at Mecca Mosque in Beed district ahead of festival celebrations, two arrested under BNS 2023 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Yechury’s approach of boldly confronting contemporary political reality and strengthening the Party was persistent and he started working out an alternative political tactical line in the place of isolationist one.

Way back in 2016 itself the former general secretary of the party who still holds strings of the organisation in his own, unique way wrote an opinion piece in Indian Express concluding that, “The threat that is sweeping through India today is one of authoritarianism, not fascism, he argued. Nor are the conditions present for a fascist regime to be established, even though a ‘determined effort is being made to reorder society and polity on Hindutva lines”

This enables us to understand that immediately after taking over the reins of the Party at the 21^st Congress, against all odds, Yechury started working on this hypothesis, What is Hindu Rashtra, and his opinion piece in Asian Age on the 10^th anniversary of Babri demolition wherein he called the demolition the beginning of fascism in India. Accordingly in the Polit Bureau meeting that was held in October 2017 he proposed an alternative line which was shot down by a majority in the Polit Bureau, then.

With unwavering commitment, however, he pursued the same with the Central Committee that was held in January 2018 where the Draft Political Resolution was adopted. In that meeting he could persuade the central committee to follow the Party Constitution which permitted him to present an alternative political tactical line backed a by minority in the Central Committee. After the January Central Committee meeting, the Tripura election results were out where the Party got routed shockingly at the hands of BJP. This helped Yechury to firm up this commitment about the need for an alternative political tactical line.

Hence, by the time the party assembled itself for the 22^nd Congress to finalise the prospective Political Tactical Line (PTL), there was a buzz in the air that in that, at the conference Yechury, would be asked to resign as general secretary. Several leaders like P Madhu, the than Andhra Pradesh secretary of the Party openly campaigned advancing this sectarian line handed down by BV Raghavulu and others that the PTL has already been settled and the question before the 22^nd Congress was merely to elect a leader (probably like BV Raghavulu, in his opinion) to steel the Party along those lines. The present day secretary of the Andhra Pradesh CPI-M unit, V Srinivasa Rao also publicly told a gathering at Bhimavaram that if Sitaram Yechury was not willing to follow the principle of democratic centralism (which implied an agreement with the sectarian political tactical line backed by the majority in the Central Committee) he would have to step down as general secretary. These narrations are but the symptoms of the malaise. If one gets into details and narrates all part of the criticism(s) against Yechury such as being a ‘Congress agent’, the list will be unbelievably long!

To come back to the main thrust of this article, the draft political resolution then summed up the three years of BJP rule, “2.78 The BJP has consolidated its political position. Under the Modi Government, there has been an intensification of the neo-liberal capitalist exploitation of the people; the secular-democratic framework of the Constitution is being eroded with the pursuit of the Hindutva agenda; and the BJP-led government has bound India closer to the imperialist strategy of the United States. All this marks the onset of an authoritarian-communal regime.” It accordingly called for “2.81 The Party should step up its intervention to advance the struggles of various sections of the working people against the economic burdens being imposed upon them. Combining these struggles against the impact of the neo-liberal policies with the struggles against the communal agenda is the way to advance the struggle against the BJP-RSS combine. The struggles against the neo-liberal 40 policies, Hindutva communalism and authoritarianism, are all inextricably interlinked.”

Having said that much, the draft political resolution stopped at the gates, when it came to the question of dealing the elephant with the elephant in the room, the looming Congress question. This confusion is well articulated in the draft, “2.90: Our tactical approach should be to cooperate with the Congress and other secular opposition parties in parliament on agreed issues. Outside parliament, we should cooperate with all secular opposition forces for a broad mobilisation of people against the communal threat. We should foster joint actions of class and mass organisations, in such a manner that can draw in the masses following the Congress and other bourgeois parties.” This paragraph reads close to the para 2.89 wherein it states, “2.89 The Party will cooperate with INDIA bloc parties in Parliament and, on agreed issues outside Parliament. The Party will join hands with all secular democratic forces on issues of authoritarian onslaughts against democracy, the use of draconian laws to suppress dissent and the opposition to efforts to subvert the Constitution and the institutions of the State.”

If we read through these paragraphs carefully and analytically, one can decipher that Prakash Karat was sticking to his original understanding formulated way back in 2016, in the recent opinion piece in Indian Express. This is why those who are willing to fight against the fascist RSS and its political offshoot which acquired fascistic characteristics being in power are so worried.

The 22^nd Congress stands as one of the milestones in the long journey of Communist movement in India. This can only be compared to that of the one in 1964 where a threadbare discussion took place about characterising the Indian bourgeoisie state.

The open and fierce discourse witnessed then at the conference split vertically. The minority who backed the Yechury’s alternative tactical line inched ahead, day by day, with more and more delegates are realising what lay ahead for them. Some delegates among those who participated in the discussion –like the ones from Punjab– encountered Prakash Karat on the dais itself by asking him, “When would you agree with the fact that India is on the tenterhooks of fascism? After our cadre and Party passes through gas chambers?” Even after being stung by such penchant criticism, Prakash stick to his line by advocating and repeating his way of thinking, the line. To put it simply, a party that has come to power through Constitutional means cannot not undermine the same.

Against this, the minority resolution presented by the then General  Secretary, Sitaram Yechury, batted for all-out war against BJP and RSS by joining hands with all secular forces including the Congress. Amidst the heated debate, perhaps for the first time in the history of CPI (M), delegates demanded a secret ballot on the Political Resolution. The situation reached a head where it was clear that if, such a secret ballot was allowed, the majority line proposed by Prakash Karat and others, was set to be defeated. Realising the intensity and sense of the house, the majority came down to a kind a battered down position and accepted partially the tactical line advocated by Sitaram Yechury. They agreed that defeating the BJP and ousting the government from the Centre was key.

Given the importance of the line then adopted, and this interpretation (by the writer) is a means to help readers understand the CPI(M) through its own documents. I am, therefore giving below the full text of a significant portion from the CPI-M’s 22^nd Congress Party documents (on the political line):

“Political Line

2.116 (i) Given the experience of the nearly four years rule of the Modi Government it is imperative to defeat the BJP government in order to isolate the Hindutva communal forces and reverse the anti-people economic policies.

(ii) Thus, the main task is to defeat the BJP and its allies by rallying all the secular and democratic forces.

(iii) But this has to be done without having a political alliance with the Congress Party.

(iv) However, there can be an understanding with all secular opposition parties including the Congress in parliament on agreed issues. Outside parliament, we should cooperate with all secular opposition forces for a broad mobilization of people against communalism. We should foster joint actions of class and mass organisations, in such a manner that can draw in the masses following the Congress and other bourgeois parties.

(v) The Party will fight against the neo-liberal policies being pursued by the BJP government at the Centre and by the various state governments including those run by the regional parties. The Party will strive to develop united and sustained actions on the issues of people’s livelihood and against the onslaught of the economic policies.

(vi) Joint platforms for mass movements and united struggles at all levels must be built up. Resistance to the anti-people policies should be intensified. The united actions of the class and mass organisations must seek to draw in the masses following the bourgeois parties.

(vii) Given the serious challenge posed by the Hindutva forces both inside and outside the government it is essential to build platforms for the widest mobilisation of all secular and democratic forces. The emphasis should be on building unity of people to fight the communal forces at the grassroots. These are not to be seen as political or electoral alliances. Similarly, broad unity to fight against the authoritarian attacks on democratic rights should be forged.
(viii) The Party will give priority to developing and building the independent strength of the Party. It will work to broaden and strengthen Left unity.

(ix) All Left and democratic forces should be brought together on a concrete programme to conduct united struggles and joint movements through which the Left and democratic front can emerge. In states, the various Left and democratic forces should be rallied to form a platform around a concrete programme. At the national level, the Left and democratic alternative should be projected in our political campaigns and to rally all those forces who can find a place in the Left and democratic front.

(x) Appropriate electoral tactics to maximize the pooling of the anti-BJP votes should be adopted based on the above political line of the Party.

This understanding is further cemented by the CPI-M’s resolution on Election Tactics which was adopted in October 2018 in face of impending general elections 2019. The Party then agreed, “There cannot be an all India alliance to fight the BJP. We have to therefore work out state-wise election tactics based on the overall electoral tactical line. We should rally (the) secular and democratic forces in the different states so that the widest (possible) forces can be mobilised to defeat the BJP and its allies.” At the same time, it also emphatically stated that the Party should strive for understanding with non-Congress secular regional parties.

The formation of the Bharatiya Rashtra Samithi (BRS) should and K Chandrasekhar Rao aiming to be key player in the post 2019 general election scenario, and Pinarayi Vijayan attending the public meeting on the occasion of BRS formation should be seen in the light of the above resolution. Finally the Federal Front fell flat in the face of the mounting BJP challenge and subsequently the BJP returned to power with enhanced strength.

Though Sitaram Yechury, given the historical background of regional parties, aware that the Federal Front was not going to materialise as such, much like a teacher guiding students based on their errors/mistakes, patiently waited for the consequences of the post 2019 general elections, the unraveling of the true face of BJP government and its parent organization the Rashtriya Swayam Sevak Sangh (RSS), given the power strings it holds on the Union Government.

The tactical and organisational maneuver adopted by the CPI (M) in the post 2019 general elections scenario will be discussed in third part of this series.

(The author, Y Venugopal Reddy, is cultural critic and practicing as advocate at Hyderabad and had contributed a series of articles in the run up to 22^nd Congress of CPI (M) at Hyderabad)

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

Read Part 1 here

Related:

Subjective thinking Hazardous for the CPI(M), India

CPI(M) must read the writing on the wall, realign to defeat fascist forces

Steer Clear from Jargon, Look at the Ground Reality: CPI(M) Today

The post Evolution of CPI(M)’s approach towards Hindutva Politics: A Reading of its own documents – Part 2 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The untimely demise of Sitaram Yechury, the General Secretary, CPI (M), a personable and astute leader also considered to be an ace tactician, less of a pragmatist, more of an orthodox Leninist,  of the  Communist Party of India (Marxist), has created a huge vacuum. Yechury contributed significantly to the understanding of Hindutva politics in India.

This article is an attempt to chart out the contribution of Sitaram Yechury to comprehend the contemporary political reality in order to realise the goals of the Left in India, which is the apparent purpose of the conduct of these such a Conference.

The Political Resolution is an important document in the history of all Communist Parties which sets out their international outlook, assesses certain core ingredients of the country’s politics and sets out a road map for action.

The Political Resolution adopted by the CPI (M) at its 21^st Congress is such an important document The question of resurgence of Hindutva politics was finally acknowledged by the CPI (M) only at its 21^st Congress wherein the Party, in the opening remarks of the resolution observed, “The advent of the BJP government represents the consolidation of the rightward shift in Indian politics. It welds together the neo-liberal thrust and the Hindutva drive with a pro-imperialist orientation. Already, the impact can be seen in the nakedly pro-big business policies which will further deepen social inequalities and intensify the exploitation of the working people. This combined with the offensive of the Hindutva forces poses new and serious challenges to our aim of changing the correlation of class forces in favour of the working people.” Further the 21^st Congress categorically declined any kind of electoral understanding with secular parties as it declared, “(Para) 2.71: The Party will give primary attention to developing and building the independent strength of the Party. At the same time, the Party will strive to develop united actions on people’s issues, defence of national sovereignty, states rights and against imperialism with other democratic forces and non-Congress secular parties. Joint platforms for mass movements and united struggles are necessary if the Party is to expand its independent strength. The united actions of the class and mass organisations will seek to draw in the masses following the Congress, the BJP and the other bourgeois parties.” (emphasis is mine)

In consonance with this finding, one would have expect the Party which developed this tactical line under the leadership of ace tactician Prakash Karat to come up with a concrete tactical approach. The tactical line adopted by the 21^st Congress was detailed from Paras 2.68 to 2.72. A bare analytical reading of the same reveals the confusion within the leadership of the Party.

Going by the tactical line adopted at 21^st Congress it appears that the first and foremost task of the CPI (M) is to defeat the BJP and its Hindutva politics. Accordingly it was held that, “(Para) 2.68: The Party has to fight against the BJP and Modi government’s policies. This is the main task at hand. This requires a concerted opposition to the Modi government’s economic policies and its Hindutva oriented social, educational and cultural policies. The Party has to conduct a political-ideological struggle against the BJP-RSS combine. However, the fight against communalism cannot be conducted in isolation. It has to be integrated with the struggle against (the) neo-liberal policies and in defence of people’s livelihood(s).”

The above enunciation reveals that the Party had yet to make up its mind to defeat the BJP and remove that party from the seat of power, at any cost. It was merely confined to fight against the BJP’s policies by opposing the Modi governments economic and Hindutva oriented social education and cultural policies. Though it called for a bold initiative to take on the politics of the landed (land-lord) bourgeoisie parties, nothing concrete had been chalked out at least to strengthen the historical bases of the Party such as West Bengal, the then undivided Andhra Pradesh and Assam. The strengthening of the party was primarily seen through the lens of the Party in power in West Bengal, Tripura and Kerala. Once the Party lost its core base Bengal, a question that was posed was about the very survival of Left politics in India.

Subsequent developments however and the policy orientations of the BJP lead by Modi which had bulldozed the foundations of parliamentary democracy caused a serious re-think within a section of the Party. Adhering to the call given by the 21^st Congress to devise a bold initiative the then General Secretary conceptualised a broader alliance of secular forces including Congress, proposed an alliance in the wake of the collusion (unspoken alliance) between the Trinamool Congress (TMC) and BJP. This strategy was agreed upon after detailed discussions and arriving at a majority within the Bengal State Committee of the Party. Accordingly there was an alliance with the Congress in terms of seat adjustments in the 2016 assembly elections. However, given electoral arithmetic (s) and mutual suspicions that developed between the core constituencies of both parties, this alliance tottered.

Surprisingly — and to the astonishment of all Indians aspiring to an alternative politics — the Polit Bureau followed by the Central Committee, both, heavily weighed down in favor of a sectarian approach, resolved that the Party in West Bengal had violated the Party’s understanding. Thereafter it was decided –by the Central Committee –to convey this (report) to CPI-M cadres across the country. With undue haste, almost a kind of one-upmanship, the Party ignored the fact that the very same leadership has scripted the Paragraph 2.288 of the Political Resolution, wherein it had been stated, that, “(Para) 2.88: The struggle for building Left and democratic unity will proceed differently in different states. Various types of Left and democratic combinations will emerge in the states and they will contribute to the building of the Left and democratic front at the all India level. The focus of all the tactics adopted by the Party should be for the realisation of a strong Left and democratic front.” Thus the Central Committee Resolution which castigated the West Bengal State Committee for its electoral understanding with the Congress, was itself, in a way, clearly against its own Political Resolution adopted at the 21^st Party Congress of the CPI-M at Visakapatnam.

Despite having such a solid tactical footing, the then General Secretary, without confrontation, allowed the resolution to be passed adhering to the principle of democratic centralism. This is another instances where the top leadership of the Communist movement in India, often, does not read, its own document and adopts a less rigorous approach.

Despite such a retreat, Sitaram Yechury gradually educated his party’s Central Committee towards the need of not merely battling against Hindutva politics, but also towards a clear-cut strategy to unseat Hindutva forces from the seat of power. Towards this end, he took inspiration from the amended Party Programme. The Party Program, amended at the CPI (M)’s 2000 Special Conference categorically stated, at Para 7.14 that “(Para)7.14: Reactionary and counter-revolutionary trends have existed even after Independence. They make use of the backwardness of the people based on the immense influence of a feudal ideology. In recent decades, making use of the growing discontent against the Congress leading to its steady decline, they are making serious efforts to fill the void left by the Congress Party. The Bharatiya Janata Party is a reactionary party with a divisive and communal platform, the reactionary content of which is based on hatred against other religions, intolerance and ultra-nationalist chauvinism. The BJP is no ordinary bourgeois party as the fascistic Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh guides and dominates it. When the BJP is in power, the RSS gets access to the instruments of State power and the State machinery. (The) Hindutva ideology promotes revivalism and rejects the composite culture of India with the objective of establishing a Hindu Rashtra. The spread of such a communal outlook leads to the growth of minority fundamentalism. This has serious consequences for the secular basis of the polity and poses a serious danger to the Left and democratic movement. Besides, a substantial section of big business and landlords, imperialism headed by the USA, is lending all-out support to the BJP”. (emphasis is mine).

The portion of the paragraph emphasised here had a direct reference to the 21^st Congress resolution wherein it called for, “(Para) 2.83:  There has to be a bold initiative to take on the politics and ideology of the bourgeois-landlord parties and to counter them with the CPI (M)’s political line and the Left and democratic programme. The Party must intervene and take up struggles on social issues.” Finally, sectarianism won and the West Bengal committee got castigated for its alleged violations. Being a leader who follows the core organisational principle of democratic centralism which says minority has to follow the majority decision, Sitaram agreed to follow the majority decision of the 2016, sometime in August that year.

This was the time when the Party castigated its own elected General Secretary to be an ‘agent of Congress’ whereas this electoral understanding with Congress revived the Save Democracy theme which had been coined by the then Party State Secretary, Bimon Basu. The 2016 Bengal elections were a watershed as they were in 2011. The 2011 elections focused only on defeat of the Left Front government by an electoral alliance sans a goal and ideology whereas the 2016 electoral understanding of 2016 focused on the Save Democracy theme in the wake of an onslaught by the a authoritarian regime in the state supported by a more authoritarian regime in center.

(In the second Part, the author, Y Venugopal Reddy, a cultural critic and practicing as advocate at Hyderabad, will deal with the evolution of the Party’s approach towards BJP’s Hindutva politics by examining its discourse towards 22^nd Conference of the Party)

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

Part 2 and 3 can be read here

Evolution of the Left [CPI (M)] approach towards Hindutva politics: A Reading of its own documents – Part 3

The post Evolution of CPI(M)’s approach towards Hindutva Politics: A Reading of its own documents – Part 1 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

According to posts on X by @HindutvaWatchIn, “Mohammad Sharif, 53, died after an altercation with Holi revellers who allegedly assaulted him when he objected to being forcibly smeared with colours” on March 15 in Unnao.

Link: https://x.com/HindutvaWatchIn/status/1903426684352606593

This aligns with family accounts but contrasts with the police narrative of a heart attack. Furthermore, AIMIM Lok Sabha MP Asaduddin Owaisi expressed outrage on X, stating, “Unnao’s Sharif was beaten to death. His crime? He objected to being forcibly smeared with Holi colour,”

उन्नाव के शरीफ को कल पीट-पीट कर मार दिया गया। उनका जुर्म? उन्होंने उन पर जबरन रंग लगाने पर ऐतराज किया। मेरी दुआएं उनके घर वालों के साथ हैं। वो सिर्फ इस नुक्सान का ग़म ही नहीं मना रहे हैं, बल्कि पुलिस के झूठ से भी जूझ रहे हैं। पुलिस इस मामले को ये कहकर बंद करना चाहती है कि ये एक…

— Asaduddin Owaisi (@asadowaisi) March 16, 2025

The Incident: a fatal encounter

Sharif, a resident of Qasim Nagar, was no stranger to hard work or resilience. The sole breadwinner for his wife, Raushan Bano, their five daughters—two of whom are married—and a minor son, he had spent over a decade abroad to secure a better future for his family. On that fateful morning, while fasting for Ramadan, Sharif stepped out in an auto-rickshaw, reportedly heading toward a dairy near Sheetla Mata Temple, just beyond Chota Chauraha. It was around noon when his path crossed with a group of revellers celebrating Holi, the festival of colours.

According to his family, the encounter quickly escalated from playful to perilous. The group allegedly attempted to forcibly smear Sharif with colours, an act he resisted. His nephew, Mohammad Shamim, recounted the scene based on witness accounts to Hindustan Times, “He was being heckled, and the revellers were determined to apply colours. When I reached the site, my uncle was requesting them not to do so. The issue seemed settled then, but later, many of them caught hold of him again” Hindustan Times reported

Witnesses told Shamim that Sharif was repeatedly slapped, a brutal assault that left him struggling to breathe. Moments later, he collapsed.

Bystanders intervened, pulling Sharif from the fray and offering him water as he sat on a nearby platform. But the relief was fleeting—Sharif soon succumbed, his body going limp in the arms of those who tried to save him. His daughter, Bushra, spoke with raw anguish to Maktoob Media. “They beat my father so brutally that he struggled to breathe. He was beaten to death. They also took the money he was carrying,” as reported by Maktoob Media on X

“They beat my father so brutally that he struggled to breathe. He was beaten to death. They also took the money he was carrying,” says Bushra, daughter of Mohammad Sharif, who died on March 15 after allegedly being assaulted by a group of people for resisting Holi colors in Uttar… pic.twitter.com/A609tcCOPm

— Maktoob (@MaktoobMedia) March 17, 2025

Taken to a hospital, Sharif was declared dead on arrival, leaving his family shattered and his community reeling.

The official narrative vs. family claims

The Unnao Police, under the Kotwali Sadar jurisdiction, swiftly took custody of Sharif’s body and ordered a post-mortem, conducted with videography by a panel of doctors. The report, as cited by the police, concluded that Sharif died of cardiac arrest, with no visible injury marks on his body. Additional SP Akhilesh Singh emphasized to Hindustan Times, “The police are investigating this case. There is no law-and-order problem as such” reported HT. The official stance suggested a natural death, starkly contrasting the family’s allegations of a violent assault.

This discrepancy ignited a firestorm of scepticism and anger. A relative, speaking anonymously to Maktoob Media, dismissed the post-mortem findings, “Bystanders saw him being thrashed. They spoke to the media, saying it happened right in front of them. How can there be no injury marks on his body?” reported Maktoob Media.

The family refused to allow the autopsy until the culprits were arrested, a stance that persisted into the late evening as police and administrative officers worked to persuade them otherwise.

Based on Minhaz, Sharif’s brother-in-law’s initial complaint, an FIR was filed against four named individuals—Kishan, Amarpal, Munnu, and Sanjay—along with others unidentified, under sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) including Section 105 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), Section 352 (intentional insult to provoke breach of peace), and Section 190 (constructive liability within an unlawful assembly). Three individuals were detained, but no arrests followed, leaving the family’s demand for justice unmet.

A funeral turned flashpoint

Sharif’s death sent shockwaves through Qasim Nagar and beyond, drawing a large crowd to his funeral that night. Around 11:45 PM on March 15, as the procession reached the Lucknow-Kanpur highway near IBP Chauraha, mourners placed Sharif’s body in the middle of the road, blocking traffic.

What the family saw as a rightful expression of grief and outrage, the police framed as a disturbance. On March 16, a second FIR was lodged—this time against 117 individuals, including Sharif’s relatives Minhaz, Sameem, and Shadab, along with 100 unidentified persons. The charges included rioting (Section 191(2)), disobedience to a public servant’s order (Section 223), abetment (Section 49), obstructing a public servant (Section 221), and causing obstruction in a public way (Section 285) under the BNS. Investigating Officer SI Brajesh Kumar Yadav confirmed no arrests had been made, but the FIR itself felt like a betrayal to the grieving family.

Minhaz, now both a complainant and an accused, voiced his disbelief to Maktoob Media from the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court, where he was preparing to file two writ petitions against the Uttar Pradesh Police, said, “I don’t understand what kind of system this is. We lost a family member. We filed a complaint against those who assaulted Sharif, leading to his death, and now the police have booked us instead of taking action against the accused,” as reported by Maktoob Media

The incident unfolded against a backdrop of heightened communal sensitivity, with Holi coinciding with Jumu’ah Namaz on March 14, prompting increased security across Uttar Pradesh. Shahr Qazi Saqib Adeeb Misbahi, who travelled from Kanpur to mediate, as per Clarion India, “Such an incident has never occurred before in Unnao’s history. Holi passed off peacefully in the district until this” as per Clarion India. He affirmed the administration’s promise of a thorough investigation, yet the family’s plight suggested a deeper malaise.

UP CM Yogi Adityanath said, Muslims are the safest in UP

Amid the controversy, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, in an ANI podcast on March 26, claimed, “Muslims are the safest in UP.” He argued that a Muslim family among Hindus enjoys safety and religious freedom, contrasting it with the vulnerability of Hindus among Muslim majorities, citing Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Afghanistan as examples. “Before 2017, riots were happening in UP—Hindu shops were burning, and Muslim shops were also burning. But after 2017, riots stopped,” he added.

A Family’s Plea

For Sharif’s family, the fight is personal. Left without their provider, they demand the arrest of all accused, monetary compensation, and a job for Sharif’s minor son. The post-mortem report and police FIRs have only deepened their sense of injustice, turning their grief into a public battle against a system they feel has failed them. As protests flared and Rapid Response Teams descended on Unnao, the question lingered: in a state claiming safety for all, why does justice feel so elusive for Mohammad Sharif’s kin?

The Unnao tragedy is more than a single death—it’s a mirror to a society grappling with bias, accountability, and the fragile threads of coexistence. For now, Minhaz stands at the courthouse, petitions in hand, seeking answers in a system that seems to have turned its back on his family’s pain.

Related:

Uttar Pradesh: Police action to deter fight for Dalit rights, says jailed activist and former IPS officer

Inquiry into rights violations by UP police during 2019 anti-CAA protests: NHRC

Assam Police Firing: Support for victims grows

The post Unnao’s Mohammad Sharif Killing: A tale of grief, injustice, and systemic bias appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Outside the auditorium, a long queue assembled in the lobby of the O’Brien Science Building. Most of them were Indian students. Eventually, I began conversing with the person ahead of me and we found seats together. He was in his late twenties, doing his masters, and had previously worked at a large e-commerce MNC (multi-national company) before moving to Ireland. I asked him why he was attending today’s talk by the foreign minister. He said that he was a big admirer of Dr. S. Jaishankar and his work, as well as ‘other leaders’ like him.

According to him, Dr. Jaishankar was a ‘smart’ and ‘bold’ person who cared for the country’s interests and how Indians were represented abroad. Challenging his point, I brought up the recent deportations of illegal Indian immigrants from the United States and the minister’s tepid response to the matter. He replied saying the immigrants had committed a crime by being in the States illegally and therefore it was right they were sent back. ‘In chains?’ I added. No, he said. ‘That went too far. But America will be America.’

As for those ‘other leaders’ he said, ‘the thing I like about this government is that they put the country first. The country comes first and then everything else.’ I found this interesting. By putting the country first, he was referring to the government’s unwavering focus on growth and development. I said that not all Indians saw this growth. In fact, most Indians still suffered gruelling poverty, malnutrition, and unemployment. Becoming aware of my political outlook and wanting to avoid further argument, he finally said, ‘everyone has their opinions. And everyone’s opinion matters.’

Meanwhile, the auditorium filled to its capacity. The students were visibly excited to see the Foreign Minister. Observing them, I became aware of the possibility that many students here may share my friend’s views. Since coming to Ireland, I’ve had mixed feelings encountering large groups of Indians. Many of them expect you to speak in Hindi, even in a foreign land, which as a South Indian I am not eager to oblige. Then there’s a cautionary feeling; one that comes with being a minority in India. I first gauge the political leanings of the people I interact with, some of whom under the guise of being ‘non-political’, defer in favour of the ruling party.

Here in Ireland, I am far away from the religious violence at home. Yet I find it strange carrying on conversations with supporters of the ruling party, pretending their views shouldn’t affect the pleasure of their company.

Why beat around the bush? I thought. I asked him frankly what he thought about the divisive politics of the government — the remaking of India as a Hindu nation, and the rise of hate speech and violence against Christians and Muslims. In response, he said that every government had its own variety of politics. Hindu-Muslim was just the ruling party’s version of it. In the end it was about winning elections, in other words — power. I was oddly relieved to hear this answer. It seemed analysed from a neutral but nevertheless, ruthlessly pragmatic standpoint.

‘But,’ he continued. ‘There must be a balance of power. Hindus have nowhere else to go in this world. What if something were to happen to us? There must be mutual respect. We respect all religions. But they should also respect us.’ By ‘they’ he meant Muslims, whom he perceived as a looming threat to the existence of Hindus.

I asked, in a country of 1.4 billion, where the majority was Hindu, Hinduism being the third largest religion in the world after Christianity and Islam, how were Muslims in India a threat to Hindus? Who lived in the constant fear of having their houses demolished, or being lynched by a mob driving home from work? In Ireland, a homicide makes it to the front page of every major publication in the country. In India, crimes against Muslim Indians and Dalits are hardly ever reported. With first-hand experience, we both laughed at the irony of this reality. In Ireland people were valued as human beings.

Most of all, I wanted to tell my friend that as a Christian I no longer felt safe in India, neither did I feel I belonged. That I was tired of being called a rice bag, a cultural traitor, with an insane desire to go around evangelizing and converting people. That it had become difficult seeing churches attacked and burnt, and parishioners beat up during our festivals. That I had grown up with Muslims, and watching their mere existence demonised with repeated calls for their slaughter was painful. That if it was Muslims bearing the maximum brunt of hatred now, it would be the Christians next. That his reasons for leaving the country and mine were very different. That I worried about my family and felt guilty I had left them behind. Did he know that feeling?

He seemed to agree with everything I was saying, yet there was something immutable in his stance. Who was I anyway, to come one day and challenge his views? Like he said, all opinions were personal and had no bearing on the other. But his opinion did matter. We were sitting in a foreign country where I considered myself safe. Because I didn’t feel safe in India, and that was directly because of his opinion and a good number of Indians who shared it.

To diffuse the tension, he laughed and said that he personally did not believe in religious discrimination, and had close Muslim and Christian friends. He apologetically repeated his first point, ‘people do anything for power. At the end the day, the powerful man rules. It’s sad, but it is the way it is.’

Forty-five minutes late, Dr. Jaishankar arrived dressed in a grey suit and tie, green for the occasion. Walking down the aisle, he was received with thumping applause. The meeting was attended by Irish and Indian ambassadors Kevin Kelly and Akhilesh Mishra as well as higher-ups and academics from UCD. The title of his lecture was ‘India’s View of the World’; an interesting topic in a time afflicted with polarisation, several major conflicts, and rising inequality. Yet apart from mentioning the developed world’s failure to meet SDGs (sustainable developmental goals), and vaguely reaffirming India’s neutrality on the Russia-Ukraine war, Dr. Jaishankar said little about what India thought of the world.

The talk seemed more about presenting India as a global superpower — robust growth, soon to be third largest economy, increasing number of airports, digitalised economy, and technological adeptness, were points he stressed on. Similarly, talk of global workplaces and collaboration in highly niche sectors like AI, drone manufacture, datacentres, and space exploration delivered in a ‘you need us more than we need you’ tone, took up most of the lecture.

Even the Q&A seemed curated with pre-selected questions to bolster this progressive and dominating image of the country.

The students were not disappointed. Every attempt at humour in the minister’s measured manner was met with laughter and delight. Every word clung to with rapt attention. My new friend laughed especially hard and clapped the loudest at the end of the talk. Looking around the audience, projecting my nausea for Dr. Jaishankar’s undeserved adulation, I realised a lot of the students were just happy to see someone in their corner. An hour before, while I waited in the queue outside the auditorium, I remembered being struck by the attire of the students around me. Most Indian students wear very basic winter jackets here. They come in dull colours, are of flimsy material, rarely fit, and are worn for the sake of warmth rather than style.

It’s not easy for Indian students studying abroad. Unlike the diversity focused college brochures, the study abroad experience for Indians is usually a lonely one, where students find themselves struggling to integrate into a new culture. They pay extraordinarily high fees (on loan) in a highly disparate currency, work stressful part-time jobs, and are for the most part broke the entire time. Their courses are chosen not out of passion, but to match the country’s Critical Skills List for the prospect of securing relevant jobs and permanent residence. They endure years of hardship to achieve one objective — making it, in a developed nation. In such conditions, symbolic gestures such as Dr. Jaishankar’s visit don’t go unappreciated.

Students cheered when Dr. Jaishankar called for a friendly visa-policy in the EU, and considered increasing shorter flights from Delhi to Dublin. These things matter to students. Hate politics, massive inequality, and upheaval of constitutional institutions back home aren’t relevant to their aspirations. If they manage to secure high-paying jobs and pay off their loans, then for all purposes, real or inflated, the government has done its work. Effectively, the government’s politics are benign and can be overlooked as long as growth, or at least the illusion of it, continued. It is selfish, wilfully ignorant, and prejudiced, but it works.

For the Indian diaspora there is another level of complexity, which is an internal feeling of cultural and racial insecurity. Indians want to be seen at par with everyone else. They wish to shed the timid, shy, thickly accented, English fumbling, and impoverished image the world has of them. Hence, the obsession with representation.

It was enough that Dr. Jaishankar was a high ranking minister, a charming man in a suite who spoke with erudition and was highly educated (He is an author of several books and has a Ph.D in International Relations). He deserved adulation not because of what he said or did, but because of what he represented to us on that stage. Speaking in front of Irish officials and university authorities, he represented what Indians could be — powerful and respected.

The BJP’s idea of development and progress is the same — symbolic gestures that indulge the aspirations and deep insecurities of the Indian psyche. The Vande Bharat train, grand airports, the perfunctory language of globalism, high growth, data, drones, and AI, are developmentally symbolic efforts to make India worthy of itself in the Western gaze. India’s view of the world is really India’s view of itself. To the Indian student subsisting on supermarket bought sandwiches and renting a dingy room in the suburbs, the narrative of the unstoppable Indian is something to draw hope and inspiration from. It validates their struggle.

The humiliating spectacle of Indian citizens handcuffed, shackled at their feet and dragged through a runway, and the governments’ failure to address it, is a case for cosmic irony. What can India say against ill-treatment of Indians overseas when it has itself become a model for far-right nationalism under the Hindutva project? Disdain for DEI policies in American Companies (which affect Ireland as well), curtailing H1Bs, and the ‘Normalise Indian hate’ climate currently unfolding in the Trumpian dystopia hurts Indians abroad. India has lost its moral ground in voicing out against racism because of what it does to its own, because nationalism is based on the consolidation of identities and suppression of all others. As countries progress toward the right and ire against immigrants rises, India shouldn’t be surprised when it points the finger and finds three pointing back — Muslim, Dalit, and Christian.

I don’t think my friend hated minorities. But the privilege of not being at the receiving end, occupied in his own aspirational struggle led him to have a certain blindness. In this case, we’ll call it prejudice. It doesn’t occur to him that Indians do well regardless of the hype of supremacy, because we are a brilliant people, and succeed wherever we go.

(The author is a student at the University College Dublin-UCD)

Related:

Why is the Govt of India silent on the spurt of attacks on Muslims, Adivasis?

Targeted attacks continue as Bajrang Dal’s disturbing trend of violence against Muslims goes unchecked

Multiple incidents of Muslims being targeted by extremist reported, attacks included hate speech and discrimination

The post The paradox of nationalism & Indian representation abroad: S. Jaishankar’s visit to my university appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Since March, action has been taken against 136 madrasas that were ‘not registered with the education department or the Madrasa Board.’ Reports suggest that, according to government estimates, the state has around 450 registered madrasas while 500 are operating without the recognition of these two departments. However, these institutions are being run under the Societies Registration Act.

A statement put out by the state reportedly said, “Action against illegal madrasas, unauthorised shrines, and encroachments will continue. Unregistered madrasas have been reported in towns bordering Uttar Pradesh, and such unauthorised institutions pose a serious security concern.”

In January 2025, the CM had first directed ordered a ‘verification drive’, and the district administrations have been surveying madrasas to ascertain various aspects, including their financial sources. In Udham Singh Nagar, the government has sealed 64 madrasas; in Dehradun, 44; 26 in Haridwar; and two in Pauri Garhwal, officials said.

Khurshid Ahmed, the state secretary for Jamiat ulema-i-Hind, claimed that the exercise is illegal as the managers of these institutions are not given notices before they are closed. “For a large-scale drive like this, the government needs to pass an order, but that has not happened. The sealing is taking place during Ramadan when the children are away at their homes. Several institutions had closed after the year-end exams. What needs to be seen is if the children will be able to assimilate with other schools and curriculum when they get transferred,” he said.

Madrasa Board chairperson Mufti Shamoom Qasmi said that the children from the sealed madrasas will be transferred to schools and madrasas nearby, and urged the administration to initiate this action. “We will look into how many children study here after the report on the drive is submitted. The children are entitled to the right to education and we will make sure it is not violated,” he said.

The issue of inequitable comparisons between educational qualifications in a madrasa and a school, Qasmi said the education department will try to resolve this. It may be recalled that, in Uttar Pradesh, the government has awarded equivalence to Munshi and Maulvi curricula in class 10 and Alim in class 12. “A set of guidelines have been formed, which will bring the congruence. The Education Board headquartered in Ramnagar will resolve this and accord recognition,” he said.

In Uttarakhand, it was the DMs (Collectors) who conducted the state-wide inspection in all 13 districts, yet, the findings are not public. Recognised madrasas come under the state boards for madrasa education, while unrecognised ones follow the curriculum prescribed by the bigger seminaries such as the Darul Uloom Nadwatul Ulama and Darul Uloom Deoband.

Related:

Uttarakhand: Six Muslims killed after demolition of Madarsa, Haldwani MLA says officials rushed the process

Lucknow demolition drives resume a day after central government’s oath taking ceremony

Demolitions as retributive state policy used against minorities in India: Amnesty

Historic 600 year old Delhi mosque demolished without notice

The post 136 madrasas sealed, Uttarakhand CM Dhami now orders probe into funding appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Prashant Koratkar and Rahul Solapurkar have insulted Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj terribly. The incompetence of the government and their utter negligence are being hidden behind the tomb of Aurangzeb. In reality, the government itself seems to be inciting riots. The ruling party is intentionally planning riots and arson in the state. When we see how Minister Rane speaks, we can’t help but wonder what’s going on in the minds of those in power. No one here respects Aurangzeb, and no one supports him. Muslims in this state, even during Shivaji Maharaj’s time, stayed loyal to the Chhatrapati, and today they still have faith in this land. Their loyalty has never been for sale. If it were, Muslims would never have been part of Shivaji Maharaj’s army. The Muslims here were loyal to the Chhatrapati then, and they are still loyal today. It was Anaji Pant and his descendants who betrayed Shivaji Maharaj and Swarajya. Not a single person in this state will support Aurangzeb. No one has recently constructed Aurangzeb’s tomb. So, why is the issue of his tomb being raised to disturb the atmosphere of the state? What is the real conspiracy behind this?

The Bahujan community needs to seriously consider this. We need to investigate whether the ruling party is more disturbed by Aurangzeb’s tomb or by the unparalleled valour of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. Those with a Peshwa mindset have never accepted Shivaji Maharaj’s greatness. They have always denied his greatness. Either they have tried to attribute his achievements to a divine source, or they have tried to link his greatness to a guru he never had. They have constantly tried to push the narrative that Shivaji Maharaj was great only because of people from their caste, like Dadoji Konddev and Ramdas, or because their intelligent and capable people supported him. Purandare has written some horrific things while elevating Baji Prabhu Deshpande. They fabricated stories that Shivaji Maharaj received his sword from Goddess Bhavani to systematically deny the strength of his own arm. Later, they tried to portray Shivaji Maharaj as an incarnation and denied his towering human personality. To do this, they devised temples and hymns. They have tried to systematically deny his greatness or present it as something that happened due to someone else. These manipulative tactics have been going on for years. During Shivaji Maharaj’s lifetime, they tried to poison him. Later, they spread the historical lie that he died due to a knee disease. No one in history has ever died from a disease called “knee disease.” This disease didn’t exist before or after Shivaji Maharaj. Just like before and after Sant Tukaram, no one was taken to Vaikuntha by a plane. Similarly, no one except Shivaji Maharaj died of this “knee disease.” Yet, these vile liars inserted this fabricated lie into history and convinced the people of it. After Shivaji Maharaj’s death, they even made multiple attempts to assassinate Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj. Eventually, they succeeded. Using Aurangzeb as a tool, these conspirators orchestrated the murder of Sambhaji Maharaj and later shifted the blame onto his own relatives. These crooks had the power of the pen and used it to deceive history. With their poisonous writings, they destroyed generations of the Bahujan community.

After the fall of the Shivshahi, Shivaji Maharaj’s samadhi was neglected. It was Mahatma Phule who found and cleaned it. After finding Shivaji Maharaj’s samadhi, Mahatma Phule was severely criticised by casteist Brahmins in Pune. They insulted him by calling him “the king of the Kunbant” (a derogatory term).

Later, when there was an effort to build a statue of Shivaji Maharaj in Pune, casteist elements in Pune’s Sadashiv Peth raised a major protest. They tried to stop the statue from being built. The Peshwa mindset’s hatred of Shivaji Maharaj is well-known. It is not something new. This hatred has been growing in their minds for the past 400 years. This hatred is still being propagated by the likes of Koratkar.

During Shivaji Maharaj’s lifetime, they denied his greatness. They even rejected his coronation, mocking him by saying, “Who is the king? How are you our king? You are just a Shudra!” Since then, they have consistently tried to diminish Shivaji Maharaj’s greatness by attributing it to other things or persons, using various falsehoods and miracles.

In the past 400 years, these conspirators have not succeeded. The kings have triumphed over them. Now, the cunning ravens are pretending to embrace Shivaji Maharaj’s legacy and are conspiring to destroy it. They are trying to create riots in his name and use them to gain political power. They are trying to brand Muslim hatred to further their narrow goals. They have ignored his remarkable achievements and historical policies for the people, and instead, they focus only on trivialities, trying to minimize his greatness. They have put in more effort to destroy Shivaji Maharaj than Aurangzeb ever did.

After Shivaji Maharaj’s death, Aurangzeb prayed for him in the court, but these Peshwa scoundrels have never abandoned their malicious plans. This brahmical mindset and their allies, have consistently belittled Shivaji Maharaj. Madhavrao Golwalkar’s remarks and what Savarkar spoke about, both expose the hate-filled minds of these people. From Golwalkar, Savarkar, James Lane, Sripad Chindam, the traitor who built a statue with a wound on its forehead, to Rahul Solapurkar and Koratkar – this long list of traitors has one common goal: to destroy Shivaji Maharaj’s legacy.

These casteist Peshwa traitors still haven’t given up their goal. Now, they want to remove Aurangzeb’s tomb, but their real plan is to erase the legacy of Shivaji Maharaj, his immense achievements, and his valour. The tomb of Aurangzeb and the grave of Afzal Khan are reminders of Shivaji Maharaj’s greatness. They are symbols of his bravery. If it were not for these, Shivaji Maharaj would never have built Afzal Khan’s tomb. Jijabai must have told Shivaji Maharaj to do so. This is something even the casteist Brahmins should consider. Who was their father? What did he do? What did his words and actions tell us? These are the questions the people must ask themselves. If they remove Aurangzeb’s tomb or Afzal Khan’s grave, what will they present as evidence of Shivaji Maharaj’s valour?

Those who claim to be descendants of Shivaji Maharaj have become so intoxicated with power that they’ve lost all sense of reason. The Bahujan community has become enslaved by these Peshwa traitors. Even if these traitors put excrement in their hands, they still take it as a gift. What has happened to their intelligence? It’s as if their sense of reasoning is either paralyzed or completely gone. How long will they keep accepting this deceitful nonsense?

Until recently, Nitesh Rane was criticizing the Sangh and Fadnavis, and now he’s the one teaching us about Shivaji Maharaj’s history and Hindutva? This is a puzzling question: What has the Bahujan community learned from Shivaji Maharaj’s history under the influence of such traitors? This remains an unsolved mystery.

(The author, based in Sangli, has written the original in Marathi: he is editor of Vajradhari, a YouTube Channel)

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabrangindia.

Related:

How communal unrest was stoked, misinformation & rumours ignited unrest in Nagpur

‘Aurangzeb ki auladen ‘, a term for Indian Muslims or high caste Hindus?

Kolhapur Maharashtra: Valorising Aurangzeb will now result in abuse & arrests

The post “It’s not Aurangzeb’s grave, but a plot to uproot Shivaji Maharaj’s valour!” appeared first on SabrangIndia.

#WATCH | Maharashtra: Explosions heard on vehicles that have been torched in Mahal area of ​​Nagpur; tensions have broken out here following a dispute between two groups. pic.twitter.com/rssI72v8od

— ANI (@ANI) March 17, 2025

#WATCH | Maharashtra: Tension breaks out in Mahal area of ​​Nagpur after a dispute between two groups. Vehicles vandalised and torched, stone pelting reported. Police personnel present in the area. Details awaited. pic.twitter.com/PPufCmM55N

— ANI (@ANI) March 17, 2025

According to multiple media reports, the violence stemmed from a demonstration organised by members of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal near the statue of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj in Nagpur’s Mahal area. The protesters gathered to demand the relocation of Aurangzeb’s tomb, which is situated in Khultabad, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar district (formerly Aurangabad). During the protest, slogans were raised, and demonstrators allegedly burned a photograph of Aurangzeb along with a “symbolic grave wrapped in a green cloth filled with grass.” Police sources indicate that the act of burning the green cloth reportedly sparked rumours, as many believed it contained sacred verses, leading to heightened tensions.

Following this, a group of around 80 to 100 people, allegedly from the religious minority community, reacted violently, pelting stones at the police and setting multiple vehicles ablaze. An alleged clash then took place between the Muslims and the protesting Hindus. The unrest led to serious injuries, including those sustained by security personnel attempting to control the mob. Among the injured are 10 anti-riot commandos, two senior police officers, and two fire department personnel. A constable remains in critical condition. The violence also resulted in large-scale destruction, with rioters torching two bulldozers and approximately 40 vehicles, including police vans.

To restore order, law enforcement resorted to using force, employing lathi-charge and tear gas to disperse the mob. In response to the deteriorating situation, Nagpur Police Commissioner Ravinder Kumar Singal imposed a curfew in several areas of the city under Section 163 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The curfew applies to the jurisdictions of Kotwali, Ganeshpeth, Tehsil, Lakadganj, Pachpaoli, Shantinagar, Sakkardara, Nandanvan, Imamwada, Yashodharanagar, and Kapilnagar police stations. The restrictions will remain in effect until further notice.

Authorities have confirmed that the situation is now under control. However, the scale of the violence, the number of injured, and the damage caused highlight the deep-seated tensions surrounding the issue. A PTI report states that at least four civilians have been injured, while more than a dozen police personnel sustained injuries during the clashes. Security forces remain deployed in the affected areas to prevent further escalation.

Nagpur (Maharashtra) violence | Curfew has been imposed in the Police station limits of Kotwali, Ganeshpeth, Lakadganj, Pachpaoali, Shantinagar, Sakkardara, Nandanvan, Imamwada, Yashodhara Nagar and Kapil Nagar in Nagpur city. This curfew will remain in force until further… pic.twitter.com/N3CqzKcMv1

— ANI (@ANI) March 17, 2025

Misinformation and rumours ignite unrest in Nagpur

The violence in Nagpur on the night of March 17 was largely fuelled by misinformation and rumours that spread rapidly on social media. The unrest followed a demonstration organised by members of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) near the statue of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj in Mahal at around 8:30 pm. Protesters had gathered to demand the removal of Mughal emperor Aurangzeb’s tomb from Maharashtra and burned his effigy as part of their demonstration.

Hours later, tensions flared when rumours began circulating that activists from Hindu groups, including VHP and Bajrang Dal, had burned a piece of cloth inscribed with the holy kalma (Islamic prayer) and had also set fire to a copy of the Quran. According to police reports, videos of the Bajrang Dal demonstration quickly spread across social media, leading to outrage within the Muslim community. What police authorities did when and while such rumours flew fast is however, unclear. A formal complaint was subsequently lodged at the Ganeshpeth police station, alleging that a holy book had been desecrated. However, Bajrang Dal office-bearers refuted these claims, stating that they had only burned an effigy of Aurangzeb and had not targeted any religious text.

As news of the alleged Quran burning spread, anger intensified. The situation escalated when reports surfaced that VHP-Bajrang Dal protesters had also burned a religious chadar near Shivaji Putla Square at Mahal Gate, a location just 2 km from the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) headquarters. Clearly this was an act meant to provoke and it is not at all evident that action was initiated by the police against these miscreants. In response, a large group gathered in protest, demanding immediate action against those responsible. The protest soon turned violent, resulting in stone-pelting, arson, and violent clashes with the police.

Officials confirmed that social media played a significant role in spreading misinformation, fuelling tensions between communities. As the unrest escalated, security forces deployed riot-control measures, including water cannons and tear gas, in an attempt to disperse the crowd. Several officers were injured in the process, including Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCPs) Archit Chandak and Niketan Kadam. Firefighters attempting to douse burning vehicles were also caught in the violence.

Eyewitnesses reported that the clashes started around 7:30 pm in the Chitnis Park area of Mahal, where groups hurled stones at the police, leaving six civilians and three officers injured. The violence then spread to other parts of the city, including Kotwali and Ganeshpeth, intensifying as the evening progressed. A resident, Sunil Peshne, told ANI that a mob of 500 to 1,000 people engaged in stone-pelting and torched multiple vehicles. He claimed that around 25-30 vehicles were damaged or destroyed during the chaos.

The timing of the unrest was particularly sensitive, as Monday marked the birth anniversary of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, the Maratha warrior-king. It also coincided with the holy month of Ramzan, further heightening religious sensitivities. The call for the demolition of Aurangzeb’s tomb at Khuldabad in Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar had gained traction on this day, adding to the charged atmosphere.

Authorities are currently reviewing CCTV footage and video clips to identify those involved in the violence. An FIR has been registered, and police teams are actively working to track down the culprits. Officials reported that the Chitnis Park to Shukrawari Talao road belt was among the worst-affected areas, where multiple four-wheelers were torched by rioters.

Residents of the Old Hislop College area near Chitnis Park spoke to PTI and claimed that a mob entered their locality around 7:30 pm, hurling stones at homes and vandalising parked cars. At least four cars were damaged, with one vehicle completely burnt. The rioters also destroyed water coolers and shattered windows before fleeing. Some residents attempted to control the fires themselves by arranging water to douse the burning vehicles.

A resident of the Hansapuri area, Sharad Gupta, recounted how his four two-wheelers, which were parked outside his home, were set ablaze by the mob between 10:30 pm and 11:30 pm. He suffered injuries in the attack and said the rioters also vandalised a neighbouring shop. He further alleged that the police arrived only an hour after the incident, by which time significant damage had already been done.

Fearing for their safety, some residents locked their homes and fled to safer locations in the middle of the night. A PTI correspondent witnessed a couple leaving their house at 1:20 am, seeking refuge elsewhere. Meanwhile, Chandrakant Kawde, a local resident involved in preparations for the Ram Navami Shobha Yatra, reported that the mob burned all his decoration materials and pelted stones at homes in the vicinity.

Angry residents have called for immediate police action against those responsible for the violence. While the situation is currently under control, tensions remain high as authorities continue their investigation.

#WATCH | Maharashtra | A local shopkeeper from Nagpur’s violence-hit Hansapuri area says, “At 10.30 pm, I closed my shop. Suddenly, I saw people torching vehicles. When I tried to douse the fire, I was hit with a stone. My two vehicles and a few other vehicles parked nearby were… pic.twitter.com/tisqTd87d2

— ANI (@ANI) March 18, 2025

Nagpur (Maharashtra) violence | Nagpur Police say – Nagpur Police has issued prohibitory orders in the city after the stone pelting and arson incident in Mahal area. More than 20 have been detained till now. Police are looking into the CCTV footage and other video clips available…

— ANI (@ANI) March 17, 2025

Police crackdown and heightened security measures

In response to the escalating violence in Nagpur, Police Commissioner Ravinder Singal deployed over 1,000 officers and imposed prohibitory orders in key areas, including Mahal, Chitnis Park Chowk, and Bhaldarpura, to restrict movement in high-risk zones. According to a Times of India report, key roads were sealed, while additional reinforcements and intelligence teams were brought in to prevent further clashes. Despite the heavy police presence, sporadic incidents of stone-throwing continued late into the night, keeping security forces on high alert.

To maintain order, authorities utilised surveillance vehicles equipped with CCTV cameras to monitor the situation in real time. Public address systems were also used to issue warnings and instruct citizens to remain indoors. Local peace committees were activated, with law enforcement urging community leaders to play a role in de-escalating tensions and preventing further violence.

Meanwhile, security around Aurangzeb’s tomb in Khuldabad has been significantly tightened following threats against the monument. Visitors are now required to register their details and provide identification before entering the site. Additional forces, including the State Reserve Police Force (SRPF), local police, and Home Guard personnel, have been deployed in the vicinity to prevent any attempts at vandalism or desecration. Authorities remain on high alert as they continue to monitor the situation and work towards restoring normalcy.

Statement by the law enforcement authorities

Amid the volatile situation, Nagpur Police Commissioner Dr Ravinder Singal provided an update, asserting that law enforcement had responded swiftly to restore normalcy. He clarified that tensions escalated following the burning of a photograph, which led to protests and growing unrest.

“A photo was burned, leading to a group gathering and raising concerns. We intervened immediately, and some individuals visited my office to discuss the matter. I assured them that an FIR had already been filed based on the names they provided, and appropriate legal action will follow.”

Dr Singal also provided details regarding the extent of the violence, noting that the incident unfolded between 8:00 and 8:30 pm. While stone pelting and arson took place, he stated that the damage was not as widespread as initially reported.

“The destruction is relatively limited—so far, two vehicles have been set on fire. We are continuing to assess the full extent of the damage. Combing operations are underway to identify and arrest those responsible.”

#WATCH | Nagpur (Maharashtra) violence: Nagpur Police Commissioner Dr Ravinder Singal says, “The situation is peaceful right now. A photo was burned following which people gathered, they made a request and we even took action in this respect. They had even come to my office to… pic.twitter.com/T4CljMg4At

— ANI (@ANI) March 17, 2025

To prevent further disturbances, Section 163 of the BNS, which prohibits gatherings of four or more people, has been imposed in the affected area. The Police Commissioner urged people to avoid unnecessary outings and refrain from taking the law into their own hands.

“We strongly advise citizens not to step out unless necessary and to refrain from spreading or acting upon false information. Other parts of Nagpur remain peaceful, with only the affected area under heightened security.”

Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) Archit Chandak attributed the unrest to miscommunication and misinformation, confirming that the situation was now under control. He reassured the public that security measures had been strengthened to prevent any further escalation.

“We have deployed a strong security presence, and the situation is currently under control. I appeal to everyone to avoid engaging in violence, including stone-pelting.”

During the clashes, several police personnel allegedly sustained injuries, including DCP Chandak himself, who was struck in the leg. Despite this, he reaffirmed the commitment of law enforcement to maintaining order.

“The Fire Brigade was immediately called in to extinguish the fires, and prompt action was taken to disperse the crowds.”

A senior Nagpur Fire Brigade official confirmed that multiple vehicles had been torched, particularly in the Mahal area.

“Two JCBs and several other vehicles have been damaged due to arson. Unfortunately, one of our firefighters sustained injuries while trying to control the fire.”

While the immediate violence has been contained, authorities remain on high alert to prevent any recurrence. However, it has been reported that the VHP further signalled that their agitation could intensify and expand beyond Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, potentially spreading across Marathwada and other districts if their demands were not met. Their statements suggest a widening of communal tensions, raising concerns about further unrest and polarisation in the region.

Speeches prior to the clashes

The communal clashes were preceded by escalating demands for the removal of Mughal emperor Aurangzeb’s tomb, a call that gained momentum among right-wing Hindu nationalist groups, particularly the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP). The organisation submitted a memorandum to Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, asserting that the tomb symbolised oppression and referencing Aurangzeb’s execution of Maratha ruler Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj and his destruction of Hindu temples. Protests in support of this demand had already taken place in Nagpur and suburban Mumbai, intensifying communal tensions in the state.

BJP MLA and Cabinet Minister Nitesh Rane’s call for Hindutva action: On the eve of the clashes, Maharashtra Minister Nitesh Rane invoked the demolition of the Babri Masjid, calling upon Hindutva groups to take matters into their own hands while assuring that the government would fulfil its role. Speaking at Shivneri Fort in Pune district on the occasion of Shivaji Maharaj’s birth anniversary, Rane made his position clear:

“The government will do its part while Hindutva outfits must do theirs. When Babri Masjid was being demolished, we did not sit and talk to each other. Our karsevaks did what was appropriate.”

His statements came as the VHP staged protests at government offices across Maharashtra, demanding the removal of Aurangzeb’s tomb and warning that if the government failed to act, they would march to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar district and demolish the grave themselves.

Rane further sought to reshape historical narratives, denouncing any portrayal of Shivaji Maharaj as a secular king.

“We must continuously emphasise that Shivaji Maharaj was the founder of Hindvi Swarajya. This identity must be reiterated repeatedly so that the attempts of certain groups to portray him as a secular king can be thwarted by true devotees of Shivaji Maharaj,” he declared.

He insisted that Shivaji Maharaj’s army never included Muslim soldiers, claiming that the British themselves had recognised him as a “Hindu General.” Rane referred to historical documents that allegedly portrayed the Maratha ruler’s conflict with the Adil Shah dynasty as a religious battle, stating that “the spread of Islam was hindered during Shivaji Maharaj’s reign.”

He also referenced the film Chhaava, which depicts the torture and execution of Sambhaji Maharaj by Aurangzeb, using it to reinforce his narrative that the conflict was driven by religion.

“Aurangzeb demanded that Sambhaji Maharaj convert to Islam. Those who argue that their battle was not against Islam, how do they explain this? If it wasn’t a fight for religion, then what kind of war was it?” he asked.

Rane concluded with a veiled call to action, stating, “This is a significant day. As a minister, I have limitations on how much I can openly say, but you all know my views. Today, I am a minister, tomorrow I may not be, but until my last breath, I will remain a Hindu.”

Statements by CM Devendra Fadnavis and other BJP leaders: Earlier on the day of the clashes, Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, while inaugurating a temple dedicated to Shivaji Maharaj in Bhiwandi, reiterated that the government would protect Aurangzeb’s grave but would not allow its “glorification.”

“It is unfortunate that we have to protect Aurangzeb’s grave since it was declared a protected site by the ASI 50 years ago. Aurangzeb killed thousands of our people, but we have to protect his grave,” he said in response to calls for its removal.

In Pune, right-wing groups gathered outside the district collector’s office, raising slogans and submitting a memorandum addressed to Fadnavis, insisting that the tomb should be removed as it was a “symbol of pain and slavery.”

The issue gained further traction when Fadnavis, on March 15, 2025, explicitly stated that he and his party believed that Aurangzeb’s grave should be removed from Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, formerly Aurangabad. However, he acknowledged that since it was a protected monument under the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), any action must be taken in accordance with the law.

Fadnavis’ remarks were in response to BJP MP Udayanraje Bhosale’s demand to demolish Aurangzeb’s grave in Khuldabad. Bhosale, a descendant of Shivaji Maharaj, had openly called for its destruction. “What is the need for the tomb? Bring in a JCB machine and raze it down. Aurangzeb was a thief and a looter,” he declared. His statement followed a heated debate sparked by Samajwadi Party MLA Abu Asim Azmi, who had earlier defended Aurangzeb as a “good administrator,” dismissing claims that he forcefully converted Hindus. Azmi’s comments led to his suspension from the state assembly for the remainder of the budget session.

BJP MLA T. Raja Singh’s open call to violence: The communal atmosphere further deteriorated when Telangana BJP MLA T. Raja Singh, speaking at an event organised by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal in Pune, tore a picture of Aurangzeb and called for violence against his admirers.

“The way I tore this poster, you should tear up those Aurangzeb lovers. We won’t stop; we will create history,” he declared.

He directly incited violence, stating, “Just like we broke Babri, now we will erase Aurangzeb’s tomb. We are ready to do this; we are ready to get our heads chopped and chop the heads of those terrorists.” He continued, “We are not scared to kill our enemies.”

Singh asserted that all Indians wanted Aurangzeb’s grave demolished and framed his demand within the broader goal of establishing a Hindu Rashtra. Though facing several criminal charges including in Maharashtra, this elected representative has not been once arrested in Maharashtra.

“I want to make India a Hindu Rashtra and fight a war for that. I want to create ‘Hindu Veers’ (militias) and demolish Aurangzeb’s tomb. I don’t care if the BJP expels me for this. A bulldozer needs to be used on that tomb.”

#WATCH | Speaking at an event in Maharashtra’s Pune yesterday, Telangana BJP MLA T Raja Singh said, “…The Hindus in Maharashtra want that Aurangzeb’s grave should be erased from the state…Kab tutegi Aurangzeb ki kabr?..I have only resolve now – to make India a ‘Hindu Rashtra’… pic.twitter.com/hpgUeV65pC

— ANI (@ANI) March 17, 2025

Deputy CM Eknath Shinde’s Remarks on ‘Traitors’: Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde, speaking at an event commemorating ‘Shiv Jayanti’ in Thane district, described those who continued to praise Aurangzeb as “traitors.”

“Aurangzeb came to seize Maharashtra, but he faced the divine power of Shivaji Maharaj. Those who still sing his praises are nothing but traitors,” he declared.

Shinde contrasted Aurangzeb’s “oppression” with Shivaji Maharaj’s legacy, portraying him as a “divine force” who symbolised bravery, sacrifice, and Hindutva. He stated, “Shiv Chhatrapati is the pride of a united India and the roar of Hindutva. Shivaji Maharaj was a visionary leader, a man of the era, a promoter of justice, and a king of the commoners.”

The climate of hostility and mistrust: These speeches, delivered in the weeks and days leading up to the clashes, fostered an environment of mistrust, communal polarisation, and incitement to violence. By framing the issue of Aurangzeb’s tomb as a direct affront to Hindu pride and linking it to historical grievances, political leaders and right-wing groups stoked tensions, encouraging hostility and, in some cases, explicitly calling for extra-legal action. The convergence of these narratives created a volatile atmosphere where communal violence became not just a possibility but an almost inevitable outcome.

Understanding the Nagpur communal clash through the “Pyramid of Hate”

The communal clash in Nagpur unfolded through a series of events—beginning with a movie distorting history followed by hate speeches promoting the historical distortion and giving it a communal angle, a planned protest, rumour-mongering, and culminating in violent clashes. This progression aligns with the “Pyramid of Hate”, which explains how intolerance grows in society, starting from implicit biases and eventually leading to violent consequences.

The Pyramid of Hate teaches us that violence is never sudden—it is a process often occurring after a systemic build-up. The Nagpur incident demonstrates how communal intolerance spreads step by step, from biased portrayals in media to unchecked hate speech, discriminatory institutional responses, and eventual clashes. To prevent such violence, it is crucial to intervene early in the pyramid—countering hate speech, debunking misinformation, and ensuring impartial law enforcement. Hate must be confronted at its roots—before it manifests in bloodshed.

1. Biased Attitudes: The role of media and stereotyping

At the foundation of the Pyramid of Hate lie biased attitudes, which include stereotyping, micro aggressions, and unchecked prejudices. In this case, the movie “Chhaava” triggered the controversy of the fight between Aurangzeb and Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj to be about the fight between two people of different faith, wherein Aurangzeb tortured the Maratha ruler because he refused to convert to Islam, the said movie, with its violent representation, allegedly contained misrepresentations or one-sided portrayals of the Mughal ruler, which was then used to reinforce existing biases against Muslims. Films have historically, and more often recently, played a role in shaping public perception, and when a narrative demonises a group, it provides fertile ground for hateful ideologies to take root. This leads people to see the “other” as inherently different or dangerous, setting the stage for further hostility.

2. Acts of Prejudice: Hate speeches and protest

As biased attitudes become more socially acceptable, they manifest in acts of prejudice, which include hate speech, social exclusion, and dehumanisation. In the Nagpur incident, hate speeches followed the release of the film, with individuals and organisations openly expressing hostility toward Muslims, deeming them to be followers of Aurangzeb and “traitors”. These speeches did not occur in isolation; they were meant to provoke reactions and mobilise groups around a shared sense of grievance.

The subsequent protest further escalated tensions. While protest itself is a legitimate form of expression, it often turns into a platform for inflammatory rhetoric. In this case, the demonstration was not just about dissent; it became a catalyst for heightened communal sentiments, reinforcing the idea that one group was under threat from another.

3. Discrimination: Institutional neglect and selective action

Hate does not spread in a vacuum; it requires institutional tolerance. Discrimination, the third stage of the Pyramid, involves systemic inequities in policies and enforcement. In many instances of communal conflict in India, law enforcement is accused of being slow to act or biased in its response. If authorities fail to curb hate speech, misinformation, or mob violence, it signals tacit approval of discrimination.

In Nagpur, the law enforcement allowed the hate speeches and protests to go unchecked in case of BJP MLA T. Raja Singh, it contributed to the escalation. Additionally, with the State CM and Deputy CM also echoing the same divisive sentiment by indulging in inflammatory diatribe against Aurangzeb and his tome, other influential leaders also got the leeway to make offensive statements. Failure to counter false narratives spread through rumour-mongering further alienated communities and deepened mistrust. This selective action—or inaction—allowed prejudice to turn into active hostility.

4. Bias-Motivated Violence: The clashes

As tensions continued to rise, the situation eventually escalated into violent clashes. This stage of the Pyramid—bias-motivated violence—includes assaults, arson, and attacks on property or individuals based on identity. At this stage, hate is no longer just a belief or rhetoric; it translates into direct harm.

The violence in Nagpur was not spontaneous; it was the culmination of escalating intolerance. The clash was a symptom of the deep-seated communal divisions that had been nurtured through earlier stages. When rumours spread unchecked and violence is justified in the name of retaliation, the possibility of a full-scale riot increases.

5. Genocide: The extreme end of the Pyramid

At the very top of the Pyramid lies genocide—the systematic destruction of a group. While the Nagpur clash did not reach this extreme, history shows that unchecked hate can escalate to large-scale atrocities. Incidents like the 2002 Gujarat riots, the 1984 anti-Sikh pogrom, and the 2020 Delhi riots all followed a similar trajectory, beginning with hate speech and rumours before descending into mass violence.

CM Fadnavis and Union Minister Gadkari appeal for calm

In the wake of communal violence in Nagpur, Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis and Union Minister Nitin Gadkari have urged residents to remain calm and not be swayed by misinformation. Highlighting Nagpur’s legacy as a city known for communal harmony, Fadnavis called upon citizens to support law enforcement efforts and refrain from spreading or acting on rumours.

#WATCH | Nagpur (Maharashtra) violence: Maharashtra CM Devendra Fadnavis says, “The manner in which the situation became tense in Mahal area of Nagpur is highly condemnable. A few people pelted stones, even at the Police. This is wrong. I am keeping an eye on the situation. I… pic.twitter.com/nBUqPv7D5U

— ANI (@ANI) March 17, 2025

“Nagpur has always been a symbol of peaceful coexistence. I appeal to all residents not to fall for false information and to cooperate with the police in maintaining order.”

Union Minister and Nagpur MP Nitin Gadkari echoed similar concerns, attributing the unrest to rumour-mongering. Stressing the importance of upholding the city’s tradition of peace, he appealed for restraint.

“Certain rumours have created a situation of religious tension in Nagpur. However, our city has always demonstrated unity in such circumstances. I urge everyone not to believe or spread misinformation and to ensure peace prevails.”

Criticism of the state government’s handling of Nagpur violence

While the administration sought to de-escalate tensions, the Maharashtra government faced sharp criticism from the opposition over its handling of the situation. Shiv Sena (UBT) spokesperson Anand Dubey held the government responsible for its failure to prevent the violence, pointing to a collapse in law and order. Expressing deep concern, he remarked,

“Maintaining law and order is the fundamental duty of any state government. The violence in Nagpur is highly regrettable—vehicles have been torched, stones have been thrown, and the situation has spiralled out of control. This is a city where people of all communities have historically lived in peace. The government has clearly failed to foster unity and prevent such unrest.”

Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Aaditya Thackeray took to X, stating, “The law and order of the state has collapsed like never before. Nagpur, the home city of the CM and Home Minister, is facing this.” His remarks underscored the irony of unrest unfolding in the stronghold of Maharashtra’s Chief Minister and Home Minister.

The law and order of the state has collapsed like never before. Nagpur, the home city of the CM and Home Minister, is facing this. https://t.co/AJxitSe1JB

— Aaditya Thackeray (@AUThackeray) March 17, 2025

Supriya Sule, Lok Sabha MP from the NCP (Sharad Pawar faction), also condemned the violence, calling it unfortunate. She urged citizens to “not believe in any rumours” and appealed for mutual harmony, reminding people that Maharashtra has always been a land of progressive ideas.

नागपूर शहरात दोन गटांमध्ये झालेल्या हिंसाचारात मोठे नुकसान झाले. ही घटना अतिशय दुःखद आणि दुर्दैवी आहे. नागरीकांना आवाहन आहे की कृपया कोणत्याही अफवेवर विश्वास ठेवू नका. परस्पर सामंजस्य आणि सौहार्दाचे वातावरण कायम ठेवण्याच्या दृष्टीने आपण सर्वांनी मिळून प्रयत्न करुयात. हा…

— Supriya Sule (@supriya_sule) March 18, 2025

Congress leader Pawan Khera pointed out that Nagpur has not witnessed riots in 300 years, suggesting that recent events were a deliberate attempt to stoke historical divisions for political gains. “Over the last several days, attempts were being made to weaponise 300-year-old history and use it now to create divisions, distractions, and unrest. These clashes expose the real face of the ideology of the ruling regime—both at the Centre and in the state,” he stated.

Reports of riots in Nagpur are deeply disturbing. Mahal is Chief Minister’s own area. In its 300 years of dynamic existence, Nagpur has never experienced riots.
Over the last several days, attempts were being made to weaponise 300 year old history and use it now to create… https://t.co/gqC5cAyz3B

— Pawan Khera (@Pawankhera) March 17, 2025

Leader of Opposition in the Maharashtra Assembly, Congress MLA Vijay Waddetiwar, went a step further, alleging that the violence was “government-sponsored”. He demanded a ban on Telangana BJP leader T Raja in Maharashtra, accusing him of instigating communal tensions. He also questioned why the BJP government, despite being in power both at the state and central levels, was protesting over the Aurangzeb issue instead of governing effectively.

Similarly, Ambadas Danve, Leader of Opposition in the Maharashtra Legislative Council, blamed CM Devendra Fadnavis and his government for the unrest, asserting that the BJP was deliberately fuelling communal disharmony in the state.

Shiv Sena (UBT) Rajya Sabha MP Priyanka Chaturvedi also slammed the ruling party, warning that the Maharashtra government was “ruining the state for political opportunism and leading it towards a violent implosion.” She pointed out that the violence occurred in Nagpur, the constituency of both the Chief Minister and the Home Minister, making their failure to control the situation even more glaring.

Instigating violence, creating instability in the state, keeping the citizens busy over the past history while getting away with tough questions on the state’s financial doom, increased debt burden, growing joblessness and farmer suicides. Maharashtra is being strategically led…

— Priyanka Chaturvedi (@priyankac19) March 18, 2025

The opposition’s critique highlights growing concerns over state-sponsored communal polarisation, the failure of law enforcement, and political machinations aimed at deepening religious divides in Maharashtra.

Related:

Colours of Discord: How Holi is being turned into a battleground for hate and exclusion

Maharashtra Human Rights Commission probes Malvan demolitions after suo moto cognisance

Hindutva push for ‘Jhatka’ meat is a Brahminical & anti-Muslim agenda

WB LoP Suvendu Adhikari’s open call for Muslim-free assembly from the Assembly must be met with action, not silence

The post How communal unrest was stoked, misinformation & rumours ignited unrest in Nagpur appeared first on SabrangIndia.

One of the most poignant representations of Holi’s true spirit came in 2019 when Unilever’s Surf Excel released an advertisement under its ‘Daag Achhe Hain’ campaign. The ad featured a young Hindu girl riding a bicycle through a neighbourhood, allowing herself to be drenched in Holi colours to protect her Muslim friend, who needed to reach the mosque for prayers. The tagline ‘Agar kuch achha karne mein daag lag jaaye, toh daag achhe hain’ (if stains are acquired while doing something good, then stains are good) beautifully encapsulated the essence of Holi—not just as a festival of colour but as a celebration of love and kindness. The parting words of the girl, “Baad me rang padhega!” (I will colour you later!), reinforced a powerful message of unity in diversity.

Despite its heart-warming message, the advertisement faced backlash from right-wing groups who falsely accused it of promoting ‘love jihad.’ The orchestrated outrage exposed the growing intolerance and the weaponisation of Hindu festivals against minorities. Instead of seeing the advertisement for what it was—a message of inclusivity—it became another excuse to stoke communal tensions.

Courageous & Amazing Holi Ad In New India

Save This Ad First, maybe the Company will be forced to remove the Ad.#Holi2025 #INDvsNZ #ChampionsTrophy2025 #BuyNothing3aOnFlipkartNow pic.twitter.com/xJ3wqJAVPr

— তন্ময় l T͞anmoy l (@tanmoyofc) March 11, 2025

Political leaders fuelling divisiveness

This calculated push to divide communities through festivals is now openly endorsed by political figures. BJP leaders have increasingly made inflammatory statements about Holi and Muslim participation in public life. Raghuraj Singh, a BJP leader, went as far as suggesting that Muslim men should wear tarpaulin hijabs if they wished to avoid Holi colours. Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath defended a police officer who told Muslims to stay indoors if they did not wish to be smeared with colours, rather than condemning such open communal bias. His words further reinforced the idea that India’s religious minorities are expected to either assimilate into the dominant narrative or be excluded from public spaces.

In Sambhal, Deputy Superintendent of Police Anuj Kumar Chaudhary suggested that since Holi coincided with Jumma namaz, Muslims should refrain from coming out onto the streets if they did not wish to be coloured. “There are 52 Fridays in a year, but Holi comes only once. Hindus wait for Holi just as Muslims wait for Eid,” he argued, implying that one festival was more important than another. Such statements, rather than ensuring communal harmony, deepen the divide and send a clear message—minorities must conform or be side-lined.

BJP MLA Haribhushan Thakur Bachaul echoed this sentiment, suggesting that Muslims should simply stay indoors if they did not wish to be smeared with colours. His dismissive remarks about the religious practices of Muslims, particularly during Ramadan, reveal an underlying disdain for the coexistence of multiple faiths. His rhetoric was amplified by the Dharam Raksha Sangh, a Hindutva outfit based in Vrindavan, which called for a ban on Muslim participation in Holi celebrations in key pilgrimage towns like Mathura and Barsana, falsely portraying Muslims as a threat to the festival’s sanctity.

Calls for exclusion and hatred

The situation escalated further when Dinesh Sharma, a Hindutva hardliner, penned a letter in his own blood to Yogi Adityanath, urging a ban on Muslim participation in Braj’s Holi celebrations. His letter contained baseless allegations that Muslims ‘spit on sweets’ and ‘adulterate colours,’ playing into dangerous and unfounded stereotypes designed to alienate the community further. He argued that just as restrictions were imposed on Muslim vendors during the Mahakumbh, similar measures should be implemented for Holi to ‘preserve its sanctity.’ These extremist narratives are not only divisive but also seek to erase the long history of shared traditions between Hindus and Muslims in India.

Opposition pushback and the struggle for harmony

Despite the rising tide of communal rhetoric, voices of reason continue to push back. Opposition leaders such as Tejashwi Yadav of the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) condemned BJP leaders for their divisive statements, questioning their authority to dictate who could or could not step out during Holi. “Who is he to say such things? Does this country belong to his father?” Yadav asked, highlighting the audacity with which right-wing politicians seek to control public spaces.

Congress MLA Anand Shankar also slammed BJP leaders, likening them to ancient forces of evil who tried to interfere in religious rituals for their gain. “This country runs on the Constitution, not on their divisive politics,” he asserted. Bihar Minority Affairs Minister Zama Khan assured that no harm would come to any community and that the administration had been instructed to ensure peace during the festival.

Festivals should unite, not divide

India has always thrived on its shared celebrations. Holi, much like Eid, Lohri, Diwali and Christmas, is a time when communities come together to forget differences and embrace one another. Yet, the increasing communalisation of festivals has put this cherished pluralism at risk. The statements by right-wing leaders and organisations reflect a broader attempt to redefine Indian identity along exclusionary lines—wherein minorities are made to feel unwelcome, their traditions dismissed, and their presence in public spaces questioned.

It is imperative to reject this divisive rhetoric and embrace the true spirit of our festivals—where colours do not mark religious boundaries but symbolise the joy of shared existence. The Surf Excel ad, despite the backlash, reminded us of an India where kindness transcends religious divides. That is the India we must strive to protect—one where festivals are moments of unity, not battlegrounds for political agendas.

Related:

Hindutva push for ‘Jhatka’ meat is a Brahminical & anti-Muslim agenda

Surviving Communal Wrath: Women who have defied the silence, demanded accountability from the state

Leaders and the spread of divisive narratives

The post Colours of Discord: How Holi is being turned into a battleground for hate and exclusion appeared first on SabrangIndia.