This article discusses the recent Supreme Court’s interim order in the petitions challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 and examines the quantum of interim relief granted against relief prayed for and comments on whether such interim relief was indeed adequate to protect the petitioners or not.

I. The Waqf Amendment Act, 2025 in brief

Before further discussion over the interim order passed by the Supreme Court in the petitions challenging the validity of the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025, it is important to understand what the amendment did. An in depth analysis of the provisions and the consequent impact of such provisions can be read here.

First, it attempted to redefine who could create a Waqf by requiring the dedicator (donor of the property) to demonstrate they had been practicing Islam for at least five years, while asserting lawful ownership over the property. Second, the Act prospectively abolished “Waqf by User” (property becoming Waqf merely through consistent religious use as it was the case of many Islamic religious institutions that have been existing since the 1800s or even before). Third, the post-amendment Section 3C introduced a mechanism allowing a designated government officer to unilaterally declare properties identified as Waqf to be “Government property,” thereby removing them from Waqf oversight. Crucially, the law also mandated compulsory registration and applied the Limitation Act, 1963, curtailing traditional protections against adverse possession claims over Waqf land.

The Disquieting Juxtaposition: Waqf vs. Others

The critical issue of discriminatory application looms large, implicating Articles 14 (Equality) and 15 (Non-Discrimination). Petitioners argued that the rigorous state control proposed by the amendments—particularly concerning land management and the mandatory inclusion of non-Muslims in governance—was unfairly imposed upon the Muslim community compared to other religious institutions.

In the landmark Shirur Mutt case (1954), which defined much of the state’s power over religious endowments, the Supreme Court indeed recognized that the right of a religious denomination to administer its property, while regulated by law (Article 26(d)), must fundamentally leave the right of administration to the denomination itself.[1] A law that entirely removes this right and vests it in an outside authority is deemed a violation. Furthermore, the imposition of a compulsory annual contribution under the Madras Act was struck down, not as a fee for services rendered, but as a “tax,” placing it beyond the legislative competence of the state. The rationale was clear: while the state could regulate the secular administration of religious trusts to ensure they are properly managed, it could not levy a tax for the promotion or maintenance of a particular religion.

There exists a stark disparity in the manner charitable institutions of different religions are treated under law, particularly when one examines the proposed Waqf Amendment provisions that impose disproportionately stringent control over the Islamic institution of Waqf. The issue is straightforward. For decades, major Hindu temples have been administered by boards composed entirely of Hindus, and at no point has the government proposed that, since temple administration is a secular activity, persons of other faiths may be appointed to those boards. Consider the endowment legislations in Karnataka[2], Andhra Pradesh[3], and Tamil Nadu[4] — each expressly requires that the commissioners and officers appointed under their respective Acts must profess the Hindu religion. This differential treatment in which Non-Muslim participation is being proposed stands in clear violation of Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law.

II. Erosion of Legal Safeguards: Property, Custom, and the Collector’s Writ

The most urgent grievances raised before the Supreme Court related to the potential for bureaucratic expropriation of historic Waqf properties, facilitated by three key amendments: the demise of ‘Waqf by User’, the mandatory registration mandate, and the introduction of a new mechanism for determining ‘Government property’.

A. The Sudden Takedown of ‘Waqf by User’ and the Time Bar

For centuries, the concept of Waqf by User acknowledged that consistent religious use of a property could establish it as a Waqf, even without a formal written deed or dedication. The petitioners stressed that many old Waqfs, lacking formalized documents, rely solely on this doctrine for their title and survival. The 2025 Amendment, however, abolished the doctrine prospectively.

The court dealt with the state’s concern saying that this doctrine had been systemically misused to encroach upon vast tracts of government land, citing instances where thousands of acres were claimed as Waqf property merely through user.

However, the sting lay in Section 36 (10) of the Amended Act, which imposed a mandatory registration requirement for all Waqfs within six months of the Act’s commencement. Failure to register within this period effectively barred the Waqf from instituting or commencing any suit or legal proceeding for the enforcement of its rights. While a proviso allows the court to entertain an application if sufficient cause for delay is shown, forcing centuries-old institutions, often poor and disorganized, to scramble for registration within a tight six-month window—after decades of varying legislative requirements and historical neglect by official bodies—constitutes a threat to rights enshrined in Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution

This provision creates precarious conditions for community rights, essentially rendering unregistered Waqfs remediless. The court’s justification was rather technical: that Mutawallis had decades to register since the 1923 Act. Yet, to adopt this technical justification would be to ignore the ground realities—the lack of formal deeds, illiteracy, and systemic administrative failures by Waqf Boards themselves—and imposing an iron-clad registration bar seems an exercise of power ill-suited to securing justice for historical endowments. The resultant inadequacy is that while the title by use remains theoretically protected for existing properties, the inability to legally defend or enforce rights over that property due to an administrative lapse effectively neuters the title. By now, the six months have passed.

B. The Usurpation of Judicial Authority by the Executive (Sec 3C)

Perhaps the most alarming feature of the amendment was the introduction of Section 3C, establishing a mechanism for determining whether property claimed as Waqf was, in fact, “Government property”. This power was granted to a “designated officer” above the rank of Collector, who, after an inquiry “as per law,” would submit a report to the State Government. If the officer determined the property was government property, they were empowered to order corrections in revenue records and direct the Waqf Board to update its records.

The petitioners vehemently challenged the provisos to Section 3C(2) and the entire mechanism of Sections 3C(3) and 3C(4). The core objection was that entrusting a revenue officer—a functionary of the executive—with the power to determine the title of property, and subsequently mandating changes in revenue records, flagrantly violates the separation of powers, an essential principle enshrined in the Constitution. The determination of property title is a function reserved for judicial or quasi-judicial bodies.

The Supreme Court, while prima facie upholding the initial clauses of Section 3C, intervened by staying the critical executive actions: the provision that the property would cease to be Waqf until the officer’s report (Proviso to Section 3C(2)), and the powers given to the designated officer to order corrections in revenue records (Sections 3C(3) and 3C(4)).[5]

The court correctly asserted that the final determination of title must rest with the specialised Waqf Tribunal, established under Section 83, which is a judicial or quasi-judicial body with appeal rights to the High Court. Furthermore, the court directed that until the Tribunal makes a final adjudication, neither the Waqfs can be dispossessed, nor can the revenue records be altered.[6]

While this stay is crucial—it halts the immediate damage of executive unilateralism—the court’s action necessarily remains an interim restraint on procedure. It does not yet nullify the underlying legislative intent, which remains an aggressive mechanism to “de-recognize” property. The final battle over whether the state can legally employ such an executive process for title investigation, even if followed by judicial remedy, awaits the final hearing.

C. The Re-imposition of Limitation

A historical protection for Waqf property, long deemed dedicated perpetually to God, was enshrined in the un-amended Waqf Act, 1995: Section 107 provided that the Limitation Act, 1963, would not apply to suits for recovery of immovable Waqf property. This immunity protected endowments from being lost through adverse possession, recognizing their unique religious and charitable status, where the owner (Allah) cannot lose title.

The 2025 Amendment, via Section 44, abolished this immunity, mandating that the Limitation Act shall apply to all proceedings related to claims or interests in Waqf property from the date of the Act’s commencement. This change was argued to be a necessary reform to align Waqf law with general property law.

For the rights under Article 25 and 26, this provision is deeply injurious, instantly exposing centuries of undocumented or poorly managed property to adverse possession claims and creating an immense burden on Waqf Boards to initiate lawsuits, many of which may now be time-barred. The petitioners did submit that the combined effect of this amendment and the deletion of the special provision for evacuee property (Section 108) means that potential recovery suits concerning historical properties, including those tied to post-Partition dislocation, could be barred by limitation.

The Supreme Court, in its interim analysis, found no prima facie case for staying this provision, arguing that applying the Limitation Act removes discrimination that existed in the un-amended Act, thereby treating Waqf property equally to other property claims.[7] This judicial stance, however, overlooks the foundational religious and jurisprudential difference: Waqf property is distinct from ordinary private property; it is permanently dedicated to a charitable or pious purpose, and management (by the Mutawalli) is merely custodial, not proprietary. To strip this perpetual immunity without offering a robust, workable transitional mechanism is an existential blow to the community’s ability to defend its patrimony.

III. The State as Arbiter

The amendments also sought to heavily influence the composition and criteria for Waqf creation, bringing the state’s regulatory gaze directly upon matters of religious identity and leadership.

A. Non-Muslim Inclusion and Secular Administration

The amendments to the composition of the Central Waqf Council (Section 9) and State Waqf Boards (Section 14) allowed for the inclusion of non-Muslim members, which petitioners argued was a direct interference in the management of religious affairs (Article 26(b)). The religious character of the Board, they argued, is inseparable from its administrative duties. Conversely, the state maintained that the functions of the Board and Council—dealing with finance, property, encroachment, and audit—are predominantly “secular activities,” which the state is empowered to regulate. The Mutawalli deals with administrative matters, while the Sajjadanashin handles the religious activities.

The court adopted a middle path, reflecting a structural compromise often seen in Indian jurisprudence. It placed limits on the executive’s expansive power, directing that the Central Waqf Council (out of 22 members) shall not consist of more than 4 non-Muslim members, and State Boards (out of 11 members) shall not exceed 3 non-Muslim members. Furthermore, though it declined to stay the provision regarding the appointment of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), it directed that an effort should be made, “as far as possible,” to appoint a CEO from the Muslim community.[8]

This, while acknowledging the need to preserve majority Muslim representation, essentially validates the state’s claim that Waqf governance is a secular activity amenable to external, cross-community administrative supervision. This position maintains that the “scale of expenses” and “administration of property” are secular affairs that can be regulated by authorities. However, this judicial accommodation reinforces the state’s role as the final arbiter of what constitutes ‘religious’ versus ‘secular’ functions—a role that academics and petitioners alike have long found problematic, not only generally but also from the case perspective.

B. The Five-Year Practice of Islam Requirement

Section 3(r) of the Amended Act stipulated that a Waqf could only be created by a person “showing or demonstrating that he is practising Islam for at least five years” and who is the lawful owner of the property. This provision was challenged as arbitrary and violating Articles 14, 15, and 25.

The state defended the rule, recalling historical legislative concerns dating back to 1923, that Waqf endowments were often used as a “clever device” to defraud creditors or evade law. The new requirement, the state argued, aimed to ensure that only genuine practitioners, and not fraudulent converts seeking a legal shield for property, could dedicate a Waqf.

The Supreme Court recognised the legislative intent but stayed the operation of this condition, not on the grounds of constitutional invalidity, but due to procedural vagueness. The court noted that in the absence of a clearly defined statutory mechanism for determining whether a person has “practised Islam for at least five years,” the provision would necessarily lead to an arbitrary exercise of power. Thus, the condition remains stayed until Government frame rules to create a viable mechanism.[9] This offers temporary procedural relief but fails to address the more substantive critique: why the state feels compelled to legislate criteria for demonstrating genuine religious practice, a function traditionally far outside the boundaries of a secular state.

Moreover, the Supreme Court in its order, while dealing with the critique that defaulters are dedicating their property to the Almighty to defraud creditors, stated that a possibility of people changing their religion to Islam to defraud the creditors cannot be ruled out. This written observation is rather peculiar since it is used to close the doors on what could have been an analysis on whether an exceptional case of a provision allowing some misuse mandates that such provision be void or not. However, the Supreme Court neither goes into that direction nor does it leave a chance open for it to be discussed at a later stage. It simply puts the reason of absence of rules over how to show if someone has been practicing Islam or not as a justification for the stay over this provision.

IV. The Shadow of Exclusion: Tribal Lands

In two areas—properties dedicated by non-Muslims and properties in tribal areas—the Court refused to grant any interim stay, upholding the state’s legislative decisions that carved out exclusions, even though these raised questions of religious liberty and non-discrimination.

Prohibition on Land in Scheduled or Tribal Areas (Section 3E)

Section 3E explicitly states that no land belonging to Scheduled Tribes under the Fifth or Sixth Schedules shall be declared or deemed to be Waqf property, regardless of any other law. This restricts the religious freedom (Articles 25 and 26) of Scheduled Tribe members who practice Islam and wish to dedicate property.

The state and the court’s prima facie view supported the amendment, rationalizing it as a measure to protect the existence of “cultural minorities” whose religious practices are distinct from Islamic religion. The legislative intent was to avoid conflicting provisions and protect the constitutional autonomy granted to tribal lands.

The inadequacy of the interim order here stems from the blanket nature of the prohibition. While protecting tribal culture is a constitutional priority, preventing an individual Muslim member of a Scheduled Tribe from exercising their right to dedicate their own property as Waqf appears to be an overly broad measure. By failing to stay this provision, the court permits a form of religious restriction justified by cultural protection, without fully weighing the individual rights of practicing Muslims within those tribal groups.

V. The Opportunity Cost: Alternatives to Sweeping Invalidation

The state’s underlying intentions, prima facie, for the 2025 amendments was the misuse, waste, and systematic misappropriation of Waqf properties by some incompetent or unscrupulous mutawallis, sometimes even in collusion with government agencies.

However, the question remains whether the state, faced with misuse, chose the most appropriate and constitutionally sensitive remedy.

As early as 1923, the legislature acknowledged the “menace of mismanagement” and responded by proposing compulsory registration, penalties, audits, and official superintendence.

The pre-amendment Waqf Act specifies duties and disqualifications of mutawallis (such as failure to maintain accounts, misuse of funds, or being convicted of encroachment). Removal provisions were extensive. Furthermore, penalizing unauthorized alienation of property was addressed by Section 52A, which prescribed imprisonment and recovery of the property.

The argument that a more appropriate, less constitutionally aggressive path existed rings true: instead of fundamentally challenging the integrity of historical titles through the abolition of Waqf by User and the imposition of executive title determination (Section 3C), the state could have rigorously enforced the existing accountability, anti-encroachment, and penalty provisions against corrupt mutawallis.

By enacting sweeping structural amendments—like applying the Limitation Act to title disputes and delegating title scrutiny to the Executive—the state opted for a sledgehammer approach to solve a problem of governance and corruption, thereby endangering the legitimate, centuries-old endowments that sustain the community. The Supreme Court’s interim relief, while protecting the procedural sanctity of title adjudication (by striking down the executionary steps of Sec 3C), ultimately permits these structural, title-threatening changes (like the prospective abolition of Waqf by User and the application of the Limitation Act) to stand pending final adjudication. This approach risks resulting in a protective regime whose effect is inadequate when weighed against the magnitude of the rights, religious history, and communal identity hanging in the balance.

(The author is part of the legal research team of the organisation)

[1] The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras v Shri Lakshmindar Tirtha Swamiyar of Shri Shirur Mutt 1954 SCR 1005

[2] Section 7, The Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Act, 1997

[3] Section 3, Andhra Pradesh Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions And Endowments Act, 1987

[4] Section 10, The Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959

[5] Para 209, IN RE: The Waqf Amendment Act, 2025 (1) 2025 INSC 1116 (Waqf Interim Order)

[6] Para 209, Waqf Interim Order.

[7] Para 201, Waqf Interim Order

[8] Para 189, Waqf Interim Order.

[9] Para 140, Waqf Interim Order

Related:

Waqf Act Amendments Partly Stayed: SC blocks government control, backs registration and reforms

Amid Waqf Debate, Should Hindu Endowment Boards be Held Responsible for the Sorry Plight of Dalits?

Waqf Amendment Act 2025: SC grants some time to Centre on condition no non-Muslims appointed to Board, Council & no change in any Waqf status

SC to UoI on Waqf Amendment: ‘Are you willing to allow Muslims on Hindu endowment boards?’

The post Understanding the Supreme Court’s Interim Intervention in the Waqf Amendments, 2025 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Social media posts suggested there was “forced conversion” or “religious mixing” happening, resulting in vigilante groups mobilising and police quickly intervening — not against the aggressors, but against individuals accused of converting others. In several districts, including Alwar, Dungarpur, and Jaipur, the people abusing Christians worked with police and other authorities, a relationship that demonstrated their collusion. The accounts below follow this trajectory — from Alwar and Dungarpur’s early raids to the violence reported in Jaipur’s Pratap Nagar — and how an entire month was essentially practice for institutionalised religious surveillance and social exclusion.

This complaint and supporting documentation derive from validated field reports and a comprehensive timeline of events built by the Coordination Committee for Protection of Freedom of Religion and Human Rights in Rajasthan — a network of civil society organisations that has been following closely incidents of harassment and hate crimes against Christians within the state. The Coordination Committee includes People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), People’s Union for Human Rights (PUHR), All India People’s Forum (AIPF), Janwadi Mahila Samiti (JMS), Rajasthan Christian Fellowship (RCF), National Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM), Adivasi Adhikar Abhiyan (AAA), and Bhil Pradesh Mukti Morcha (BPMM), among others. Their Joint Press Statement of September 25, 2025, chronicled targeted attack incidents, police harassment, and coercive raids in the wake of the Rajasthan Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Bill, 2025. CJP’s submission relies on that data to further triangulate it with independent media reports, HindutvaWatch documentation, and on-ground interviews to provide a detailed record of an organized campaign of intimidation conducted under the cover of “anti-conversion vigilance.”

Gelota, Alwar (MIA Thana, Alwar district)

Police conducted a raid on September 3 on a hostel for children that allegedly housed approximately 25 poor children run by a missionary in Galota (Udyog Nagar locality). The police action followed a complaint filed by a VHP activist alleged that a “conversion” was underway. The police reportedly confiscated literature, a FIR was filed; the police arrested two hostel staffers—listed in the log as Amrit (a teacher) and Sonu Rai (press reports also identify her as Sonu Singh/Garasia)—and detained them in judicial custody. Reports indicate that local Sangh affiliate groups (VHP/Bajrang Dal) coerced the authorities into arresting. Media reporting addresses the arrest and the police case; civil society groups who monitor the case remark that it is the first in a spate of incidents after the anti-conversion bill was introduced.

Khetolai Village (Bhabru Thana), Kotputli-Behror District

On September 9, less than an hour after the anti-conversion legislation was introduced in the Assembly, officers arrived on the property of a house in the family of brothers Vikram and Rajendra Kanav, who host their own satsang/prayer meetings. The brothers state they were told, rather explicitly, not to hold prayer sessions with outsiders, then were brought to the police station and interrogated, finally being coerced into signing a form, or written undertaking, indicating they would not hold their satsangs and would not “invite outsiders” to their home. The brothers’ account of the incident follows a trend being run in the community by local Sangh activists (identified in the log as Shri Ram Samiti), who have consistently threatened this family in various ways. Complaints were made, in writing, not only to the SP but also to other organizations such as the PUCL.

Paota (Pragpura Thana), Kotputli-Behror district

A similar incident took place in Paota on September 9. Believer Gajanand Kuldeep stated that the next morning after the Bill passed, the SHO summoned him, stating that if he hosted prayers, meals, or called people outside again, he would be arrested. He testified that he was forced to sign a document that indicated he would stop doing this activity. Like the Khetolai incident, PUCL passed his application on to the SP, and was kept on the record as an example of coercive policing as part of wider harassment following the Bill introduction.

Jhelana, Bichiwada, Dungarpur District

Local Hindu sangathans and a Sant Samaj group protested outside a minority-run school and its church ahead of the scheduled prayer service on September 10, claiming the school was a site for the conversion of Adivasi students and parents. Police arrived in significant numbers; the school maintained that it is a minority-run educational institution and denied that there had been any conversion activity. The incident intensified tensions, but no FIR was filed in relation to the protest. The account refers to this as an incident as an event of communal mobilization involving pressure from authorities on students and staff in the school community.

In a separate case in Durgapur on the same date, an Adivasi organiser with a local mazdoor sangathan said she was stopped on the road and verbally threatened by VHP/Bajrang Dal activists who accused her organisation of “converting Adivasis.” Also, the landlord of the office supposedly threatened to evict them. The organiser described it as demoralising and reported that a formal complaint was being prepared, and civil society groups mentioned that this harassment was part of the broader campaign.

St Paul’s Hostel School, Patela, Dungarpur City

On September 11, after investigation and complaints, including a health inspection in early 2023, the district authorities responded to complaints (made by the ABVP and others) by issuing an order to close the hostel/school for alleged record-keeping and sanitation infractions. The Child Welfare Committee, in collaboration with district education and administration personnel, whisked away 230 children to their families; the authorities issued show-cause notices and initiated proceedings under the JJ Act against the school authorities. The staff contends that the closure is a result of pressure from right-wing student groups and has displaced the school kids and staff; reports are that the school is seeking legal remedies to restore the school to operation.

Chak-6P hostel school (Anupgarh, Sri Ganganagar district)

On September 16, an incident log entry reported a nocturnal attack on a hostel school for orphans: students and adult supervisors were said to be frightened by an enterprising attack on the site in the middle of the night. The log entry does not provide many public details but lists the incident as one of a multitude of attacks aimed at Christian institutions in the district. Similarly, civil society narratives identify hostel attacks as part of a continuation of incidents.

Ward No. 14, Anupgarh Thana (District: Sri Ganganagar)

A local citizen complained on September 17, stating that a person who lived in the area (whom we cannot identify in the log) had been “converted” as per missionary activity; the Vishwa Hindu Parishad filed a police complaint in support of this local citizen. The officer of the law arrested two persons, associated with a missionary prayer group, by the names of Polus Barjao and Aryan, and began an investigation to ascertain the degree of conversion processes. It was reported that a third person (the landlord) was in hiding from police arrest. The two arrested were later remanded and put into judicial custody; the case file states the Indian police were undertaking active investigations into conversion processes, as per the FIR filed by the VHP.

Pratap Nagar (Sector 08/82/625), Jaipur (Rajasthan)

On September 21, approximately 40–50 Bajrang Dal activists allegedly entered a private residence where Pastor Bobas Daniel was conducting a prayer meeting of about 15–26 people. According to local sources, the Bajrang Dal group locked the doors, broke items, and physically assaulted congregants. Neighbors, including a pregnant woman and the landlady, attempted to intervene to protect the victims, but allegedly were beaten themselves. Victims state that eight were injured; the police filed the FIR only after lengthy protests and community pressure for accountability. Locals expressed concerns over delayed police responses, no prompt documentation from medical professionals, and failure to arrest persons who assaulted congregants, despite eyewitness evidence provided by victims. Media accounts confirmed both the attack and the delay of police response.

On September 23, 2025 — Hindustan Bible Institute (HBI), Pratap Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

Almost 50 Bajrang Dal activists surrounded the campus of HBI after a visit from two visiting staff members from the head office of HBI. The protesters were targeting HBI due to accusations of “forced conversions” of members of a local church. Police officers escorted the visitors from out of state to the police station after probable cause occurred from the protests. The mobile devices, Aadhaar cards, and property documents were confiscated from visitors and some local staff, and the property of the institute was detained. Guests left the facility for the night but were there after civil society intervened, although some devices and property papers were withheld. Civil society groups described the detainment as broad and the lack of property restoration as violations of their freedom of movement and association, and also demanded the immediate restoration of property and arrest of the perpetrators. National and international news services reported on the incident; civil society organized delegations to meet with senior officers and issued joint statements condemning the attacks.

Engineered Vigilantism and the Mechanics of Fear

In September 2025, an evident and purposeful pattern of inciting violence against Christians was followed. Most incidents started with rumours of “forced conversions”, often transmitted via WhatsApp groups or VHP, Bajrang Dal, or ABVP local units, targeting schools and hostels run by Christians or prayer gatherings. These allegations served as incitement to coordinated raids, mob assemblies, and police involvement, all as a rubric of vigilance. Many of the same incidents occurred across Alwar, Dungarpur, Anupgarh, and Jaipur. Pastors in Alwar and Kotputli-Behror were summoned and pressured into signing undertakings not to pray. Groups on the right stormed educational and welfare institutions for Adivasi and Dalit children in Dungarpur and Anupgarh, accusing them of “conversion through education”. The apex of these events occurred in Jaipur’s Pratap Nagar, where a mob assaulted those attending prayer, kicked several women, and destroyed public and private property while police sat by or arrived late.

Such violence was rarely spontaneous. The same three steps were followed: rumour being spread, mob assembly, and state validation of the violence through a raid or a politically motivated delay in filing an FIR. Even if the violence ended quickly, the intimidation and coercion continued – everything from pastors suspended from conducting worship, to schools sealed, to social workers leaving in fear.

While Rajasthan represented the focal point, the scenario reflected a national agenda. When combining repeat attacks by Hindutva affiliates with the targeting of marginalized groups, this wasn’t simply random aggression, but a more comprehensive policy of surveillance and social exclusion acted along with administrative acquiescence and ideological consensus.

The Rhetoric of Conversion and Cultural Purity

At the core of these campaigns rests a control ideology – an ideology that sees religious diversity as a danger, and that views women, Dalits, and Adivasis as “vulnerable bodies” who need to be protected from conversion. The rhetoric here is reminiscent of the more familiar tropes of Hindutva propaganda: the notion that Christian charity disguises “mass conversions,” that western forces undermine Indian culture, and that Hindu identity must be “defended” under the watchful gaze of vigilantism. The word “conversion” operates much like “love jihad” in anti-Muslim rhetoric – shorthand for cultural invasion and the fear of demographic change. However, the terms of conversion are also intended to implicate Christian schools and welfare Institutions in “Westernising” India’s poor through education and through care, thus recasting social uplift as social subversion. With the most recent incidents in September as one instance, foreign and local pastors were referred to as “agents.” New believers became “traitors,” and Christian education was labelled as “mental colonisation.” Such language comes out of Far-Right narratives and foretells danger while dehumanizing the minority population. Such language, too, perversely renders violence a moral obligation.

These narratives are meant to reinforce (and reproduce) caste hierarchies, wherein Dalit and Adivasi populations are painted as “vulnerable to corruption,” while maintaining caste(s) boundaries of purity-pollution under the guise of religion. The institutional forces of religion, caste, and nationalism become a single ideological and controlling matrix, which is central to Hindutva mobilisation.

In the end, it is political, not religious. As elections approach, “conversion panic” tells the story of a group working to unite the base and distract from the failures of governance. By presenting Christians as controlling the marginalized and suspicious, those invoking conversion panic can generate both moral panic and political capital, repurposing faith-based fear into electoral gold.

Silence, Complicity, and the Erosion of Protection

If there is a pattern that is as troubling as the violence itself, it is the silence—or worse, complicity—of the machinery of the state itself. All over Rajasthan, police responded to violence against Christians with bias, siding with aggressors over victims. In Alwar and Ktputli-Behror, officers pressured Christian pastoralists to sign undertakings prohibiting worship rather than offering protective services. In Dungarpur, Christian schools and hostels were invaded by police, who conducted raids without warrants, sometimes only after complaints from VHP or Bajrang Dal workers. In Pratap Nagar, Jaipur, women were assaulted and prayer halls were vandalised without the police filing any FIRs against the perpetrators. Instead, those praying were questioned as to their “conversion motives,” effectively treating them as suspects in their own community.

This pattern demonstrates not only bureaucratic indifference but collusion between law enforcement and vigilante groups. Normative lines of state duty have blurred with the mood of majoritarian sentiments in ways that create a situation of fear, putting Christians in the position of suspicion. By repeating the language of “conversion vigilance,” police and district officials not only create confusion around maintaining civic responsibility, but they also license mob violence in the name of duty.

The overall consequence is that constitutional protection is slowly torn asunder. Article 25 protects freedom of religion; Article 21 protects dignity and freedom. But the rights are now conditional – subject to majority privilege. The events of September 2025 show that when the state becomes a mechanism of ideological enforcement rather than neutrality and fairness in justice, citizenship itself becomes stratified based on faith. Unless there is accountability and equal protection can be guaranteed under the law, the glamorized promise of secular democracy will be meaningless but abiding, while hate will continue to loom under the guise of law and order.

(The legal research team of CJP consists of lawyers and interns; this resource has been worked on by Preksha Bothara)

Related:

A week of escalating persecution: Far-right Hindu groups target Christian gatherings in India

The Anti-Conversion Law of Rajasthan: A threat to individual liberty and religious freedom

“Anti-conversion laws being weaponised”: CJP seeks interim relief against misuse of anti-conversion laws

Everyday Atrocity: Mapping the normalisation of violence against Dalits and Adivasis in 2025

Anti-Christians Widespread hate events on the eve of X’mas, Punjab, UP, Kerala, Rajasthan

The post September of Fear: Targeted Violence against Christians in Rajasthan exposes pattern of harassment after Anti-Conversion Bill appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The complaint, addressed to NCM Chairperson Iqbal Singh Lalpura, seeks urgent intervention under Section 9(1)(d) of the National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992, requesting a full inquiry, registration of FIRs against hate speech offenders, and preventive directions to curb vigilante activity and incitement.

Background: The hate campaign after “Operation Sindoor”

According to the complaint, the rise in hate speech is not random but follows a pattern of political and administrative hostility that began after the launch of Operation Sindoor in April 2025. CJP states that post the said operation, arbitrary action officially framed as a crackdown on illegal immigration has increased, degenerating into a campaign of ethnic profiling and arbitrary expulsions, resulting in over 1,500 people being “pushed out” into Bangladesh between May and July 2025 without legal verification by Foreigners Tribunals or access to legal aid.

CJP warns that these actions have created a climate of fear among Bengali-speaking Muslims, especially migrant workers in cities like Mumbai, Delhi, and Ahmedabad, who now face harassment, eviction, and assault under the guise of “protecting the state from infiltrators.”

Scope of incidents documented

The complaint meticulously catalogues over two dozen hate speech incidents between June and September 2025, with supporting links from mainstream and independent media as well as verified social media posts.

• Assam: The epicentre of anti-Muslim rhetoric

CJP identifies Assam as the focal point of the hate campaign. Under the banner of the “Miya Kheda Andolon” (“Expel the Miyas Movement”), local organisations and political figures have launched public drives to evict Bengali-speaking Muslims, often with violent undertones.
Among those named are:

• Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma, who made inflammatory remarks alleging that “newly arrived Muslims” weaponise beef consumption and have built mosques near Satras “to drive out Hindus.”
• Situ Barua of Jatiya Sangrami Sena and Milan Buragohain of All Tai Ahom Students’ Union, both accused of stopping buses and threatening Muslim labourers to “vacate Upper Assam.”
• Bir Lachit Sen, whose followers reportedly conducted door-to-door “document checks” and forced evictions.

CJP documents 18 rallies and nine incidents of targeted violence across 14 districts of Assam in just three weeks (July 9–30, 2025), pointing to a coordinated effort to normalise vigilantism against Bengali-origin Muslims.

• Bihar: Hate speech for electoral gain

As the Bihar Assembly elections approach, CJP notes a strategic deployment of hate speech to polarise voters. Union Home Minister Amit Shah, Union Minister Giriraj Singh, and several BJP leaders including Jagannath Sarka and Samik Bhattacharya are cited for using communal rhetoric in public rallies. CJP highlights a disturbing pattern — speeches describing Bengali-origin Muslims as “demons,” “Rohingya infiltrators,” and “threats to Hindu women” — all couched in the language of demographic panic and cultural invasion.

The complaint underscores that no voter deletions have occurred on the basis of foreign nationality in Bihar’s updated electoral rolls, exposing the falsehood behind the “infiltrator” narrative. Instead, the rhetoric has dehumanised entire groups of internal migrant workers.

• Hate speech spreading nationwide

The complaint lists similar hate-laced incidents across Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Delhi, and Maharashtra, including:

• Kapil Mishra’s speech at Delhi’s PGDAV College claiming a “Rohingya and Bangladeshi settlement conspiracy.”
• Nitesh Rane’s rally in Navi Mumbai urging Hindus to avoid “goltopis and dadiwallas.”
• Mahadev Baba’s hate-filled tirade in Lucknow describing Muslims as “cannibalistic infiltrators.”
• A mob attack at the Constitution Club of India that disrupted a civil society event on Assam’s detention and eviction crisis with chants of “Desh ke gaddaron ko, goli maaro saalon ko.”

Legal and constitutional analysis

CJP’s complaint goes beyond documenting hate speech — it situates these acts within the framework of criminal and constitutional law, citing the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (Sections 196, 197, 352, 353) and Section 125 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
The organisation argues that these offences are cognisable and non-bailable, and must invite suo motu action by police in compliance with the Supreme Court’s directives in Shaheen Abdulla v. Union of India (2023).

The complaint draws on key judicial precedents:

• Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan (2014) – defining hate speech as an act of marginalisation and de-legitimisation of vulnerable groups.
• Tehseen Poonawalla (2018) – directing states to curb vigilante violence and appoint nodal officers to monitor hate crimes.
• Amish Devgan (2020) – establishing a higher standard of responsibility for influential figures in public life.

CJP contends that the repeated participation of ministers and legislators in inflammatory campaigns represents a violation of constitutional morality and betrays the secular fabric of the Indian state protected under Articles 14, 15, 19, 21, and 25–30 of the Constitution.

CJP’s key demands to the NCM

The complaint calls upon the Commission to:

1. Take legal cognisance under the NCM Act and initiate an inquiry.
2. Direct registration of FIRs against individuals and organisations spreading hate.
3. Curb vigilante activity by outfits like Bir Lachit Sen and All Tai Ahom Students’ Union.
4. Ensure police compliance with Supreme Court orders on suo motu action.
5. Enforce preventive measures, such as videographing rallies and banning repeat hate offenders.
6. Urge social media platforms to remove hateful content.
7. Launch a fact-finding mission on the profiling, harassment, and eviction of Bengali-origin Muslims nationwide.

Conclusion

CJP’s complaint represents one of the most exhaustive compilations of hate speech documentation in recent months, combining legal precision with humanitarian concern.
It frames the current climate not as a communal clash but as a “systematic campaign of hate speech that slurs, stigmatises, and instigates violence against lawful citizens.”

By appealing to the National Commission for Minorities, CJP has sought to reclaim the constitutional promise of equality and secularism, urging that the language of hate not become the language of governance.

The complete complaint may be read below:

Related:

CJP calls for action by NCM against hate speeches at Dharam Sansad and Trishul Deekha events, files 2 complaints

CJP moves NCM against arms training camps, weapon distribution events in Assam and Rajasthan

CJP complains to NCM over Uttarakhand Muslim exodus; seeks urgent action

CJP moves NCM against Shiladitya Dev for targeting the ‘Miya Muslim’ community of Assam

The post CJP urges NCM action against hate speech campaign vilifying Bengali Muslims as ‘Infiltrators’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Bulldozers arrived early, and one by one, the structures came down. Shahid’s house — built in the 1920s and considered a symbol of pride for local sports lovers — was also reduced to rubble.

Why the demolition took place

The demolition was part of a planned 3.3 km four-lane road widening project in Varanasi, in the Prime Minister’s parliamentary constituency. The area affected includes a 300-metre stretch near Court Road intersection, where 70 houses are marked for removal. So far, 35 structures have been taken down.

Officials from the district administration stated that the affected families were given compensation in advance and were also issued a one-week ultimatum to vacate.

Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh: Bulldozers were deployed at Court Chowk for road widening from Court to Sandaha. About 13 houses, including that of hockey player Padma Shri Mohammad Shahid, were demolished pic.twitter.com/MH6EDqEFvB

— IANS (@ians_india) September 28, 2025

“We have provided the compensation to the families and also gave an ultimatum a week before. We had told them that they should get their parts of the homes removed from the area designated for the road project, or the administration will do it. When the families did not take action, we had to,” a senior official told reporters, as The Free Press Journal reported

Shahid’s home: A landmark with history

Mohammad Shahid was one of India’s greatest hockey players. Known for his unmatched dribbling, he was a key member of the Indian team that won gold at the 1980 Moscow Olympics. He later captained the team in 1985–86 and was honoured with the Arjuna Award in 1981 and Padma Shri in 1986.

His home in Varanasi, where he was born and grew up, was more than just a house. It was a symbol for young athletes, especially aspiring hockey players. The house had become part of local memory — a place where people would often stop and speak of his achievements.

Family response: ‘we will miss this place’

According to the City ADM, Shahid’s family has nine legal heirs, out of which seven accepted the compensation. However, two family members were still staying in the house, unable to leave due to lack of alternative accommodation.

“Our memories are there in this home. This is our home. We will miss this place,” said Nazneen, a relative of Shahid. “The administration has given us the compensation; seven shareholders took it, but we have no place else to go, so two shareholders still stay at this home.”

In Kashi, authorities used a bulldozer to demolish the house of Padma Shri hockey player Mohammad Shahid. Despite pleas from people for a one-day delay, the police administration went ahead with the demolition. pic.twitter.com/pezTDf64HT

— The Observer Post (@TheObserverPost) September 28, 2025

The demolition took place despite their presence and their request for just one more day.

Bulldozer politics: A rising pattern

This incident adds to a growing trend across many Indian cities where bulldozers are being used aggressively as a tool for enforcement — from illegal encroachments to urban development. While authorities call it necessary, critics say it often comes without enough sensitivity or dialogue.

In Shahid’s case, despite legal procedure being followed, the emotional weight of the demolition was heavy, given the stature of the person once living there.

Request for memorial

Though the family has come to terms with the demolition, they have now made a humble appeal to the administration — to build a memorial or square in Shahid’s name at the same spot.

“Let something remain here that tells future generations that this is where a hockey legend lived,” said Nazneen.

PWD Executive Engineer KK Singh responded positively to the request that “It’s a great suggestion. Shahid was a national icon. We’ll speak to the District Magistrate about creating a memorial in his name.”

The road will soon be wider, traffic may ease, but Varanasi has lost more than a few walls. It has lost a place tied to its sporting history.

On September 28, a bulldozer didn’t just remove a structure — it closed a chapter. Now, the city must decide how it wants to remember the man who brought it Olympic glory.

Related

Bulldozer Justice: you can’t just roll in with bulldozers and demolish homes overnight: SC

Acquiring land without due procedure would be outside the authority of law, Supreme Court lays down 7 Constitutional tests for land acquisition

Supreme Court rebukes “Bulldozer Justice,” plans to issue nationwide guidelines to prevent arbitrary demolitions

The post Ancestral home of Olympic Gold Medallist & Padma Shri Mohd. Shahid demolished in Varanasi Road widening drive appeared first on SabrangIndia.

According to a Newslaundry investigation, Gaud framed the order as a safeguard against “love jihad,” claiming that Muslim salesmen could use interactions with women customers to form relationships. He gave traders a September 25 deadline. By the eve of the deadline, the impact was visible: more than 50 Muslim employees had already lost their jobs, and at least four Muslim shopkeepers had been forced to vacate their spaces. The market has around 500 shops, with between 100–125 Muslim salesmen and 10–15 Muslim shop renters, many of whom have now been displaced.

Human Cost: “Jobless just because I am Muslim”

The consequences of the campaign have been devastating for those who built their lives in the market.

• Gabbar Ghori (52), who has worked in the bazaar for four decades, told Newslaundry: “I was only 12 when I started here. Since then, I’ve never left. Both my sons also worked here. Now, all three of us have lost our jobs. We earned ₹50,000–60,000 together, with ₹21,500 going towards our flat’s EMI, ₹3,500 for a bike loan, and ₹5,400 for a personal loan. Suddenly unemployed, we don’t know how to survive. For the past 25 days, I haven’t eaten or slept properly.” His employer, he said, was sympathetic but afraid, asking him to either take leave or work secretly until “things calm down.”
• Mohammad Gulzar (42), another salesman with 30 years in the market, said he earned ₹22,000 a month, with ₹7,000 going towards rent and the rest supporting his two children’s schooling. “Now I am jobless just because I am Muslim. Employers are compelled to remove us under political pressure. Despite being citizens of this country, we are forced to endure this,” he told Newslaundry and later repeated during a protest march covered by the Free Press Journal.
• Rahmat Khan (32, name changed) explained that Muslims have worked in the market for decades. “Suddenly political leaders accuse us of being part of so-called ‘love jihad.’ They are forcing our employers to remove us. The most painful part is that no one—police, politicians, or social workers—is helping. Who will give us jobs now?” he asked in his complaint, cited by Newslaundry.
• Shakir Mohammad, the sole earner for his mother, wife, sister, and two children, told Newslaundry: “Tomorrow is the deadline. Around 50–60 people have already been removed.”
• Mohammad Harun (55), who has run a rented shop in the bazaar for 20 years, told Newslaundry that Gaud’s supporters demanded ID cards of all his eight employees—six Muslims and two Hindus. Days later, his landlord asked him to vacate by September 25. “My owner was kind to me, but he was under pressure. They would have targeted him if he had refused.”

Association’s endorsement of “cleansing”

Rather than resisting, the Sheetla Mata Bazaar Vyapari Association has largely endorsed Gaud’s diktat. In a report by ThePrint, association president Hema Panjwani defended the order, saying: “Muslim salesmen would stand on the road to call in customers and stare at women passing by. Now Aklavya bhaiya has tightened the noose. Nobody should have rented their shops to Muslims in the first place; all of them will have to vacate. Once this succeeds, we will implement it in other markets too.”

Association member Anil Sharma, described as a close aide of Gaud, told ThePrint that Aadhaar details of shop employees are being collected to note their religion. The campaign has been named “bazaar ka shuddhikaran” (purification of the market), with Sharma adding: “The second step would be to investigate each Muslim employee’s involvement in ‘love jihad’ cases.”

Another member, Pappu Maheshwari, confirmed to ThePrint: “Bhaiya has requested us to politely ask retailers to remove Muslim salesmen.”

Police cite “no video evidence”

When Newslaundry asked Indore Police Commissioner Santosh Singh about the issue, he claimed no one had approached him and referred queries to the local DCP. DCP Anand Kaladgi said no FIR could be filed against Gaud because “he has not made any statement openly, and there is no video evidence except what is in the media.” This, despite Muslim workers submitting a written complaint to the commissioner’s office on September 15, explicitly alleging that they were being targeted for political gain.

Two traders told Newslaundry anonymously that no action would be taken since the market lies in the constituency of Gaud’s mother, BJP MLA Malini Gaud.

Protests and political reactions

As the deadline approached, Muslim workers staged silent protests inside the market and later held a march from Bajaj Khana Chowk to Rajwada, reported by the Free Press Journal. Carrying placards, they demanded the right to continue their work without religious discrimination. “We are Hindustani and have been doing business here for decades,” Gulzar told FPJ. “Business should be business, not politics. For 30–35 years we lived peacefully here, and now we are being pushed out just because we are Muslims.”

This communal move was not only protested by Muslims, but also Hindus. Many came out to resist this forceful eviction, like Balwant Singh Rathore (40), a shopkeeper in Indore.

“The harmony between Hindus and Muslims should not be shattered, and they should be given equal opportunities to earn a living,” he said.

#Indore #Islamophobia

Balwant Singh Rathore (40), a shopkeeper in Indore, is opposing the forceful eviction of Muslim shopkeepers and salesmen from the city’s historic Sitla Mata Market.

“The harmony between Hindus and Muslims should not be shattered, and they should be given… pic.twitter.com/FSSiSx0RSQ

— काश/if Kakvi (@KashifKakvi) September 24, 2025

The Congress also intervened, with city chief Chintu Chouksey submitting a memorandum demanding an FIR and warning that Gaud’s statement was an attempt to “disturb communal harmony” in Indore (FPJ Shorts).

Gaud’s controversial record

This is not the first time Eklavya Singh Gaud has found himself in controversy. As Newslaundry noted, he was accused of roughing up a police constable during a temple visit, booked for assaulting Congress workers, and was the complainant in the case that landed comedian Munawar Faruqui in jail for over a month over a joke he reportedly never cracked. According to FPJ, he even warned that the Hind Rakshak Samit would take “direct action” if his directive was ignored.

A chilling precedent

The Sheetla Mata Bazaar episode reflects a broader trend where livelihoods and businesses are targeted through the lens of communal identity. As September 25 arrived, scores of Muslim families were left jobless—not for misconduct or inefficiency, but because of a political ultimatum backed by the local trade association and tolerated by police inaction.

Related:

Two Sons, One Spirit: Muslim men perform Hindu mothers’ last rites in Rajasthan and Kerala

Tilak, ID Checks & Religious Tests: what’s happening at Garba events?

Madhya Pradesh Muslim man lynched in Rajasthan’s Bhilwara over cattle transport; family alleges religious targeting & extortion plot

The post Indore’s Bazaar Purge: Muslim workers and shopkeepers forced out under BJP leader’s ultimatum appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The most recent incident took place on September 23 in Pratap Nagar, Jaipur—a constituency represented by the Chief Minister himself. What should have been a routine visit by religious leaders to a Christian training institute quickly turned into a scene of fear, aggression, and misuse of police authority.

This has prompted civil society groups to issue a joint statement, condemning the violence, demanding justice, and urging the state government to uphold the rule of law and protect constitutional freedoms.

What happened at Hindustan Bible Institute in Jaipur?

The Hindustan Bible Institute (HBI) in Jaipur, established to train pastors and Christian leaders, has been functioning peacefully for years. But on the afternoon of September 23, around 3 PM, it was surrounded by nearly 50 members of the Bajrang Dal, who accused the institute of engaging in religious conversions.

At that time, two guests—one from HBI’s head office in Chennai and another from Bagidora, Banswara—were present at the institute for a scheduled inspection visit. Without any proof or official complaint, Bajrang Dal members began protesting aggressively, claiming the two were in Jaipur to carry out conversions.

Instead of protecting the visitors or dispersing the crowd, the local police from Pratap Nagar Thana detained the two HBI guests for “questioning.” Their mobile phones were seized. The police also confiscated the institute’s laptops, landline phone, pen drive, and even official documents, including property papers.

“The police took the two Guests from outstation HBI offices to the Police station in the name of enquiry and seized their phones as if they had committed a crime,” — Joint Civil Society Statement

This action—without any legal warrant or confirmed wrongdoing—has shocked many and highlighted the growing misuse of police power in religious matters.

Christian families living in fear

The HBI centre in Jaipur is run by two local Christian families, who were also present during the incident. Civil society members who later visited them reported that the families were shaken and afraid for their safety. They had simply been hosting two guests for an official inspection—something that any organisation does regularly. Yet, after this incident, they now live in fear of further targeting or retaliation, despite doing completely legal and constitutionally protected work.

“They were terrified as to what may befall them when they were doing absolute legal work under the Indian constitution,” — Delegation after meeting the HBI families

Second attack in CM’s own constituency in just three days

Shockingly, this wasn’t an isolated case. Just two days earlier, on Sunday, September 21, Pastor Daniel was attacked while leading a Christian mass in a private house in Pratap Nagar. His prayers were disrupted, and he was assaulted.

Despite protests by the local community, an FIR was registered only after several hours. As of now, no arrests have been made in that case either. Civil society leaders pointed out that both attacks occurred within the Chief Minister Bhajan Lal Shamra’s constituency, showing a complete disregard for peace and communal harmony, even in areas under direct state leadership.

“This was the second incident in the CM’s constituency in three days,” — Civil Society Statement

The role of the anti-conversion bill: law or license to harass?

According to the joint statement, these incidents are not random—they are part of a larger pattern that began after the Anti-Conversion Bill was tabled and passed in the Rajasthan Vidhan Sabha earlier in September.

Since then, nine incidents targeting Christians have been reported:

• 2 attacks in Dungarpur
• 1 in Alwar
• 2 in Jaipur (including the HBI incident and Pastor Daniel’s attack)
• 2 cases of police harassment in Kotputli-Behror district
• 2 incidents in Anupgarh, Hanumangarh, including a break-in at a children’s hostel and assault of two Christian staff

Civil society groups argue that the Anti-Conversion Bill has created a climate of suspicion and intolerance, where any religious gathering or activity is falsely framed as an attempt at forced conversion, leading to mob violence and police misuse.

Civil society responds: urging accountability and justice

In response to the Pratap Nagar incident, a delegation of civil society organisations met with DCP Sanjiv Nain, ACP Vinod Kumar Sharma, and SHO Manoj from Pratap Nagar Thana. The delegation included Sawai Singh, John Mathew, President of Jaipur Christian Fellowship (JCF), Father Vijay Pal Singh, Joint Secretary of JCF, Kavita Srivastava of the PUCL.

They condemned the police actions and mob aggression and demanded:

1. Immediate release of the two HBI guests detained unlawfully
2. Return of all confiscated items, including phones, laptops, and documents
3. Arrest of the Bajrang Dal members responsible for the protest and disturbance
4. Strict action to prevent further attacks on minorities

“Till strict action is not taken, such incidents will continue,” — Civil Society Delegation

United stand: who signed the statement?

The joint press statement was issued by multiple rights and minority organisations across Rajasthan, including Jaipur Christian Fellowship, Rajasthan Samagra Sewa Sangh, PUCL (People’s Union for Civil Liberties), APCR (Association for Protection of Civil Rights), Rajasthan Baudh Maha Sangh, NFIW (National Federation of Indian Women), AIDWA (All India Democratic Women’s Association), Daman Pratirodh Andolan, Rajasthan, Buddhist Society of India, Jamat-e-Islami Hind, Rajasthan, Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind and Dalit Muslim Ekta Manch.

This shows that the issue is not just about Christians, but about the broader erosion of civil rights and religious freedoms in the state.

An urge for rule of law, not rule of fear

The repeated attacks, police overreach, and growing fear among Christian families in Rajasthan are more than isolated incidents—they represent a systemic problem that is threatening India’s constitutional values. If religious minorities cannot carry out their daily prayers or official inspections without being accused, detained, or threatened, then the rule of law itself stands compromised.

The civil society groups are clear in their message: This must stop. Now.

“Such communal incidents and attacks on minorities need to stop now,” — Joint Statement

They call upon the Rajasthan government to act decisively—not just to protect the rights of one community, but to preserve the secular, democratic fabric of India.

Related:

“Your Helplessness feels in the garb of Protection”: SC rebukes CBI for failure to arrest officers in custodial death case of Deva Pardhi

“Shielding their own”: Supreme Court slams Madhya Pradesh police, transfers custodial death probe of a tribal man to CBI

“No One is Above the Law”: Supreme Court demotes Deputy Collector for demolishing a slum settlement by flouting HC order

The post Rajasthan: Civil Society demands arrests, rule of law and end to minority targeting under anti-conversion law appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The victim serves as the imam of the village mosque and also teaches Urdu to local children. On the day of the incident, he was returning home on his bicycle after class when, he says, he was intercepted by a group of young men who had been harassing him over several days.

“Some boys had been bothering me for the past few days,” Mustakeem told

“They stopped me on Saturday when I was returning home on my bicycle and told me to chant ‘Jai Shri Ram’. When I refused, they took out sticks and beat me, and also asked me to go to Pakistan” as Times of India reported

The assault, which reportedly lasted nearly two hours, left him severely injured and hospitalised.

Imam beaten, told ‘bury him here’

The imam’s testimony reveals a grim picture of targeted violence. According to him, the group not only beat him but made chilling remarks during the attack.

“They wouldn’t let me get up and said, ‘Yahi dafnado’ (Bury him here),” he recalled.

Local bystanders eventually intervened and rushed the injured imam to a nearby hospital. Several others who came to his aid were also reportedly hurt in the fracas. Mustakeem stated that he had earlier refrained from reporting previous harassment in hopes that it would subside on its own. “I didn’t want to cause tension in the village,” he said

Sensitive Content
This media contains sensitive content which some people may find offensive or disturbing

Link: https://x.com/iamharunkhan/status/1969609117888098571

Police deny communal motive, call it a simple scuffle

Responding to the allegations circulating on social media, City Superintendent of Police (SP) Mrigank Shekhar Pathak stated that the incident appeared to be a case of minor conflict and not communal in nature. 

He said that “A case has come to our notice through social media, in which   person is stating that he was forced to chant some religious slogans and was beaten up. In this regard, it is informed that yesterday, dated 20.09.2025, at Lodha Police Station, under Gram Bulakgarhi, a person named Mustkeem was going on his bicycle when some children came in the way, and during the process of removing those children, he had an argument with a person named Jishan who was standing nearby. This led to a scuffle between the two individuals, resulting in injuries.”

Pathak added that both individuals were treated medically and were stable. 

“The police attended the incident on the spot and also conducted a scene inspection. In this connection, it is also informed that both individuals have been sent for treatment; both are stable now, and their medical examinations have been conducted” he added

Dismissing the claims of religious coercion, he said:

“Upon investigation, the matter appears to be a case of simple assault; no element of any religious angle or forcing to chant religious slogans has emerged in this case. This claim is completely false, and the Aligarh Police refutes it. Legal proceedings are being followed in this matter, statements from both parties have been received, and there is peace at the scene.”

थाना लोधा- सोशल मीडिया के माध्यम से एक प्रकरण संज्ञान में आया है, जिसमें एक व्यक्ति द्वारा बताया जा रहा है कि उसे कुछ धार्मिक नारे लगाने को मजबूर किया गया था और उसके साथ मारपीट की गई थी, इस संबंध में अवगत कराना है कि कल दि0 20.09.2025 को थाना लोधा में ग्राम बुलाकगढ़ी अन्तर्गत… pic.twitter.com/w6C66VHg67

— ALIGARH POLICE (@aligarhpolice) September 21, 2025

Community leaders said UP Police trying to brush the incident under the carpet

Local Muslim leaders have decried what they perceive as a deliberate effort to downplay the incident’s communal overtones. Among the most vocal is Sayyed Abdullah, president of the Aligarh unit of Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind.

“Imam Mustakeem suffered injuries and is in hospital. The police are trying to brush the incident under the carpet,” Abdullah told The Times of India. “We are planning to meet the SSP to ensure that an FIR is filed in connection with the case” as TOI reported

Abdullah said that the delay in legal action is a reflection of a growing trend where victims from minority communities face systemic indifference.

Patterns of intimidation

Notably, the imam’s ordeal is not an isolated incident but part of a wider pattern where religious minorities are coerced into displaying loyalty to the majority faith — or face brutal consequences. The chant “Jai Shri Ram”, while a common religious invocation for many Hindus, has increasingly been used by extremist elements as a litmus test for patriotism or allegiance to majority community ideals.

When refused, such slogans have, in many past instances, preceded mob assaults — particularly against Muslims and Dalits. Videos of these confrontations have frequently surfaced on social media, though legal consequences often remain elusive.

Related

Tilak, ID Checks & Religious Tests: what’s happening at Garba events?

Navratri: Communal demands mark pre-festival protest in Jabalpur

VHP leader assaults Muslim youth attempting to enter Navratri event in UP

The post Imam refused to say ‘Jai Shri Ram’, assaulted in UP and told to ‘Go to Pakistan’, no FIR filed yet appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The final days

On September 14, 2025, Amzad succumbed to cancer at the State Cancer Institute, Guwahati. Just four months earlier, on May 28, 2025, he had been detained and confined in the Matia detention camp, Goalpara. His health rapidly deteriorated inside confinement, but despite medical advice recommending palliative care outside, he remained in custody until his last breath.

The Gauhati High Court was due to hear his pending case, WP(C) 5297/2025, on September 15, 2025 — just a day after his death.

A villager turned “D-Voter”

Amzad was a resident of Rowmari Pathar, a village on the banks of the Brahmaputra in Barpeta district. In 1997, his name was marked as a “D-voter” in the electoral rolls of Chenga constituency. His wife, Maymala Begum, and his mother were similarly marked.

Poverty and illiteracy meant that Amzad could not afford to fight the label. “Our family’s legacy is recorded since the 1951 NRC. His father, Hajo Sekh, and forefathers were registered voters even in 1966,” said Abdul Jalil, Amzad’s cousin.

The Tribunal’s verdict

In 2017, Amzad’s case was referred to the 7th Foreigner Tribunal, Barpeta (Case No. 998/17). He appeared through years of hearings, even during the pandemic. On December 9, 2022, the Tribunal declared him a “foreigner.”

But the family says they were never informed. “Our lawyer kept telling us there were just two more hearings left. We didn’t even know the judgment had already come,” recalled Maymala.

Unaware of the decision, Amzad continued his work as a daily wager — until police abruptly detained him in May 2025.

Fear and helplessness

Amzad and Maymala have seven children — three sons and four daughters. Yet in his final months, his wife dared not visit him in detention or hospital. Branded a “D-voter” herself, with her case still pending in the High Court, she lived in constant dread of being seized too.

Maymala hold up a tiny photo of Amzad

“What if I was also caught and locked in Goalpara Camp?” she asked, torn between grief and fear. Despite her parents’ names being recorded in the 1951, 1971 and 2019 NRCs, she alone was excluded.

Ignored appeals

Amzad’s condition worsened after his cancer diagnosis on August 11, 2025. The Superintendent of the detention camp even advised the family to seek his release for treatment. Jalil, his cousin, wrote a formal plea to the Goalpara Deputy Commissioner on September 1, 2025, requesting that Amzad be freed for medical care.

But no response ever came. Instead, officials summoned the gaon bura (village headman) to inform the family that Amzad’s health was failing. By the time they reached Guwahati Medical College, it was too late.

Doctors’ reports clearly stated that “no treatment modality was left” and only palliative chemotherapy was possible — yet the authorities refused to act.

The final farewell

After two days of official formalities, on September 16, 2025, Amzad’s body was handed over to his family. That evening, he was buried in Rowmari Pathar, just 1.5 km from where he had been detained months earlier.

He was buried as an Indian, in the very soil that had disowned him. His two sons working as migrant labourers in Chennai could not even return to attend the funeral.

A cry for justice

Assam CJP Team visits the grieving family at their home 

A delegation from Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP), including state in-charge Nanda Ghosh, advocate Abhijeet Choudhury, DVM of Barpeta Jafar Ali, and local volunteers, visited the grieving family. Jalil showed them the unanswered letter he had sent to the Deputy Commissioner.

“I begged the authorities to release him for treatment. But they kept him locked up until he died. And then, they gave us his body,” Jalil told them.

The cruel paradox

Amzad Ali’s story is not just a personal tragedy; it reflects a wider, systemic cruelty. For decades, thousands have lived under the burden of being branded “doubtful” or “foreigners.” Amzad lived that stigma, died in custody, and was finally buried in the land he always called home.

A citizen in life, denied recognition by the state. A foreigner in papers, but an Indian in death.

Amzad’s death is the second in Matia detention camp this year. On April 17, 2025, Abdul Matleb also died under similar circumstances. Both men were declared “foreigners” during their lifetime, only to be buried in their native villages in Assam. 

The story of Abdul Matleb may be read here.

Separate report on Ali’s death may be read here.

Related:

From Detention to Deportation: The mass deportations and detention crisis at Assam’s Matia centre

SC: Only 10 deported, 33 of 63 contest foreigner status from the Matia Transit Camp, Assam

Supreme Court condemns appalling conditions at Matia Detention Centre in Assam, labels situation a ‘sorry state of affairs’

Victory in Dhubri FT: Jarina Bibi declared Indian after years of ordeal

The post From Assam’s Soil to Detention and Back: The tragic death of Amzad Ali appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Many observers believe this push for exclusion is not just about religious identity, but a calculated move to stir communal tensions in the run-up to municipal elections. By focusing attention on who gets to celebrate, the narrative risks shifting public conversation away from everyday concerns like water-logging during the monsoon, crumbling roads, and the steady relocation of industries—issues that directly affect people’s lives.

This trend of the weaponisation of India’s festivals has been visible over the past decade. Last year, October 2024, Citizens for Justice and Peace documented how, In Gujrat’s Kutch district a Dalit family was allegedly beaten up for attending a Garba event by the members belonging to the upper caste.

VHP’s communal demand: compulsorily check Aadhaar card, and apply tilak on participants

In a move that seeks to redefine the very nature of community celebration, the VHP’s advisory for Maharashtra’s Navratri events laid out a clear protocol for exclusion. It was not a mere suggestion but a detailed set of instructions for enforcement, transforming entry points of festival venues into checkpoints of religious identity.

The first step in this new code is the mandatory verification of identity through Aadhaar cards. This measure, organisers were told, was to ensure that only individuals from the Hindu community could gain access. Following this screening, the second step was the application of a tilak on the forehead of each participant. This traditional mark, historically a symbol of welcome and piety, was repurposed as a visible marker and a final stamp of approval, confirming a person’s religious identity before they could join the festivities.

According to the Indian Express, Shriraj Nair, the VHP’s spokesperson in Maharashtra, articulated the rationale behind this exclusionary stance in stark terms. “The Navratri festival is not just fun and frolic. It is a religious event where devotees worship gods and goddesses. Hence, non-Hindus should not be allowed in garba-dandiya events,” he stated.

Nair framed the issue through a theological lens, questioning the presence of those who do not practice idol worship at a festival centred around it. He then issued a stark ultimatum that erased any ambiguity about the campaign’s intent: “If Muslims are so eager to participate, let them convert to Hinduism and wholeheartedly accept our religion. After all, they can trace their roots back to their Hindu ancestors. They are late converts. We have no objection if Muslims accept the Hindu religion and participate”, as reported.

Last week, September 16, we had reported how right-wing outfits AHP–Rashtriya Bajrang Dal had demanded a ‘Muslim ban at Navratri garba in Jabalpur,’ citing ‘love jihad’. Echoing such negative calls including from Guna also in Madhya Pradesh, the organisations had also demanded Aadhaar checks, threatening the administration with consequences if tensions escalate!!

The ideological justification: from ‘love jihad’ to “theological debates”

The foundation of the VHP’s campaign is the “love jihad” conspiracy theory—an unproven claim that Muslim men are engaged in a systematic plot to lure Hindu women into relationships with the sole aim of converting them to Islam. This narrative has been a recurring theme for right-wing groups, and Navratri, with its large gatherings of young people, is being presented as a prime ground for such activities.

In previous years, the VHP has actively monitored prominent garba venues, checking Aadhaar cards of attendees and applying tilak marks as a form of religious identification—practices it intends to continue this year.

However, senior VHP member Prashant Titre stated, “Our stance is clear, and our campaign will continue this year too.” He emphasised that “Garba-dandiya organisers should ensure only Hindus are allowed after strictly verifying every participant’s Aadhaar card”, as Times of India reported

The VHP further alleged that Navratri celebrations are being misused to promote instances of “love jihad,” claiming that many Hindu women and girls have been deceived by individuals from other religions under the guise of romance. With families attending in large numbers, the group argues that such events are vulnerable to exploitation by “anti-social and criminal elements.” As a preventive measure, the VHP has called for mandatory CCTV surveillance at all venues and urged the police to implement stricter security protocols and issue clear guidelines.

The Quran strictly prohibits idol worship, why should such people come to Garba? asks BJP

Maharashtra BJP spokesperson Keshav Upadhye took to X (formerly Twitter) to argue that the ban was, in fact, an act of respecting Islam. He wrote, “The Quran strictly prohibits idol worship (Surah Al-Ankabut – 29:25). So, for those whose religious scriptures themselves ban idol worship, participating in Hindus’ Garba is an insult to their own faith! Yet still – why should such people come to Garba?”

He positioned the exclusionary stance not as an act of enmity but as one of “preserving respect for religions,” arguing that “’Only Hindus in Garba’ – this insistence promotes harmony in society and mutual respect.”

कुराणात मूर्तीपूजेचा कठोर निषेध आहे (सूरा अल-अन्कबूत – 29:25). मग ज्यांच्या धर्मग्रंथातच मूर्तीपूजेवर बंदी आहे, त्यांनी हिंदूंच्या गरब्यात सहभागी होणे हा त्यांच्या स्वतःच्या श्रद्धेचा अपमान!
तरीदेखील – अशा लोकांनी का यायचं गरब्यात?

रास गरबा महोत्सवात ‘देवी’च्या मूर्तीसमोर…

— Keshav Upadhye (@keshavupadhye) September 22, 2025

A nationally coordinated hateful campaign

The campaign in Maharashtra is not an isolated event but a playbook being implemented across several other states, indicating a coordinated national strategy.

In cities across Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, the message of exclusion was made public and official. Organisers in Bhopal, Khandwa, Kota, and Bhilwara erected large banners and posters at city squares and venue entrances, explicitly warning non-Hindus against even thinking of entering Garba pandals.

Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh

On September 13, weeks before Navratri began, members of the Antarrashtriya Hindu Parishad (AHP) and Rashtriya Bajrang Dal staged a formal protest in Omti. They submitted a memorandum to local authorities demanding a complete ban on Muslim participation, organisation, and attendance at Garba events. Citing “love jihad” and the argument that Bollywood songs “hurt the sentiments of Sanatan Dharma,” they warned that the administration would be held responsible for any “escalation in communal tensions.”

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by Hindutva Watch (@hindutvawatchin)

Satna, Madhya Pradesh

On September 18, the members of the VHP and Bajrang Dal took to the streets, reciting the Hanuman Chalisa, burning tyres, and blocking roads. Their demands included the removal of nearby meat markets, which they alleged were illegal, and a strictly enforced ban on non-Hindus at all Garba events in the district. They also submitted a memorandum with the demands to district officials.

SP leader supported the ban on Muslim entry in Garba events

Reacting to the developments, Samajwadi Party leader S.T. Hassan from Moradabad offered a different perspective, welcoming the ban. He said, “I welcome this action because Navratri is a religious event. Idol worship is not acceptable in Islam, so if any Muslim brother goes there, he would be acting against his religious beliefs. As I have mentioned earlier, Muslim youths should consider Hindu girls as their sisters…”

Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh: Reacting to the ban on the entry of Muslims in garba pandals, Samajwadi Party leader S.T. Hassan says, “I welcome this action because Navratri is a religious event. Idol worship is not acceptable in Islam, so if any Muslim brother goes there, he would be… pic.twitter.com/mtdnd48BLn

— IANS (@ians_india) September 22, 2025

However, incidents from last year in Jhansi, Indore, Dewas, and Guna also show that this isn’t just a series of random flare-ups—it’s becoming a worrying trend. In several BJP-ruled states, festivals like Navratri are increasingly being turned into platforms for exclusion. Muslim artists and youth have been singled out, stopped from performing, harassed, and even attacked, all under the claim of protecting religious sentiments. These aren’t isolated cases—they reflect a deeper effort to push certain communities out of public and cultural spaces. Festivals, which once brought people together, are slowly being used to drive people apart.

Related:

Navratri: Communal demands mark pre-festival protest in Jabalpur

VHP leader assaults Muslim youth attempting to enter Navratri event in UP

Delving into the hearts and minds of ‘killers’ who took the life of journalist-activist, Gauri Lankesh

The post Tilak, ID Checks & Religious Tests: what’s happening at Garba events? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The victim, Aasif Babu Multani, and his cousin Mohsin, both residents of Multanpur in Mandsaur, had travelled to Bhilwara’s Lambia Raila cattle market on September 15 to purchase oxen and buffaloes for their fields and dairy business. As reported by Indian Express, in the early hours of September 16, as they drove home, their pickup van was chased, forced off the road, and surrounded by 14–15 men who dragged them out and beat them mercilessly.

According to Mohsin, who managed to escape by hiding in nearby woods, the mob kept shouting “gau taskar” (cow smuggler) as they rained blows on Aasif. The report of The Hindu provides that “They didn’t even ask questions. They saw cattle, saw Muslims, and decided we were smugglers,” he said. The assailants also allegedly seized ₹36,000 in cash, snatched purchase receipts, and used Aasif’s phone to call his family, demanding an additional ₹50,000 to spare his life.

Aasif was first taken to Bhilwara’s Mahatma Gandhi Hospital with severe head injuries and later referred to Jaipur’s Sawai Man Singh Medical College for neurosurgery. He succumbed to his injuries on September 20. He leaves behind his wife, a two-and-a-half-year-old daughter, and an eight-month-old son.

His brother, Manju Pemla, broke down while speaking to The Hindu: “My brother’s only ‘crime’ was that he was Muslim and transporting cattle. There wasn’t even a cow in the van—only oxen and buffaloes. They killed him because of who he was.”

Police response

According to abplive, Bhilwara Superintendent of Police Dharmendra Singh confirmed the arrest of five individuals and the registration of an FIR under several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, including attempt to murder, unlawful assembly, wrongful restraint, voluntarily causing hurt, and extortion. A parallel case of alleged cow smuggling has also been filed against the victims.

According to the report, a Special Investigation Team (SIT) has been constituted to probe the case using CCTV footage and digital evidence. Officials say the SIT will also examine whether personal enmity, extortion, or a roadside altercation played a role. However, family members insist that the attackers are part of organised cow-vigilante groups well known for harassing cattle traders.

Despite the arrests, Pemla pointed out that several accused specifically named in the FIR remain free. “The men Mohsin identified from social media videos are roaming around. Until they’re caught, we cannot feel safe,” he said.

Aasif’s death underscores a chilling pattern—where mob violence around cattle transport blends religious prejudice with criminal opportunism, leaving ordinary farmers and their families shattered.

The killing, reported in the inside pages of national dailies also reveals a sombre normalisation of such targeted vigilante driven violence; something that is almost accepted as a norm!

Related:

Assam BJP’s AI video a manufactured dystopia, Congress files complaint, myths exposed

The life and death of Amzad Ali: Declared foreigner, buried Indian

Ghaziabad Horror: Dalit family assaulted in targeted attack

Right-wing groups demand Muslim ban at Jabalpur Navratri garba

The post Madhya Pradesh Muslim man lynched in Rajasthan’s Bhilwara over cattle transport; family alleges religious targeting & extortion plot appeared first on SabrangIndia.