The effect of this orchestrated online hate campaign is multi-faceted and deeply damaging. Socially, it fosters an environment of fear and distrust, further polarising communities and entrenching existing prejudices. The constant barrage of hateful content online normalises discrimination and can incite real-world violence and ostracisation. This digital propaganda effectively weaponises social media, turning it into a platform for disseminating prejudice and enacting a form of collective punishment due to stereotypes.

In Dombivli, protesters called for economic boycott of Muslim vendors

While a protest was organised in Dombivli city of Thane district ostensibly to condemn the Pahalgam terror attack, disturbing elements within the gathering have surfaced, raising serious concerns about the underlying motivations and potential for communal incitement. A video from the event reveals a man addressing the assembled crowd, and instead of solely focusing on denouncing terrorism, he openly called for the economic boycott of non-Hindus within the area. This inflammatory rhetoric specifically targeted the livelihoods of fruit sellers and local vendors, effectively painting an entire community with the brush of suspicion and demanding their economic marginalisation.

This shift in focus from condemning a specific act of violence to targeting an entire religious demographic for economic strangulation is deeply alarming. It highlights how events intended to express national solidarity and condemnation of terrorism can be hijacked by individuals seeking to propagate divisive agendas and incite discriminatory practices against minority communities, turning grief and anger into tools for economic coercion and social exclusion within the local sphere of Dombivali.

The insidious nature of online hate lies in its ability to spread rapidly and anonymously, leaving a lasting scar on the social fabric and hindering any prospects of reconciliation and understanding.

Nine BJP workers booked for ‘abusing, assaulting’ Muslim hawkers in Dadar

Similarly, Mumbai police have registered a case against nine BJP workers, including Akshata Tendulkar, president of Mahim Assembly, for allegedly abusing and assaulting Muslim hawkers in the Dadar market area, following a complaint filed by hawker Saurabh Mishra. The case is being handled by the Shivaji Park police.

The Indian Express reported that the incident happened on Thursday evening. Tendulkar and his eight associates reached Dadar market area opposite Rangoli store and allegedly asked hawkers if they were Muslims, the complaint read. Mishra added that they assaulted one of the Muslim workers who work under him.

“They asked my worker Sofiyan Shahid Ali his name and then abused and assaulted him. When Ali ran away from the place, they chased him and again assaulted him,” Mishra said

In a separate account, Tendulkar, speaking to a news channel, defended the group’s actions by asserting they were pressing for police intervention against alleged Bangladeshi nationals using forged Indian documents. He claimed that their repeated complaints about illegal immigrants selling produce in the area had been consistently ignored by law enforcement.

“We had requested police to take action against those Bangladeshi nationals who have created fake Indian documents and were selling fruits and vegetables as hawkers. We and local residents were angry over the matter. Local residents were asking us what the BMC and police are doing? On Thursday we had gone on a round to check where all Muslim people works and what (solution) can be done” Tendulkar said, reported the Indian Express.

DCP Zone 5 Ganesh Gawde stated that the Shivaji Park police station has registered a case against the nine accused under sections 189(2), 191(2), 115(2), 351(2), and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, as well as sections 37(1) and 135 of the MP Act. He confirmed that the investigation into the matter is currently underway

BJP’s national spokesperson, Shehzad Poonawalla, offered a similar narrative, using the same platform to urge a different kind of boycott. He took to X, stating, “Dear Hindus Jaat ke naam pe batoge, Toh Dharm ke naam pe katoge Telling you this as an Indian Muslim, Jo tumhe jaati me baante – take a pledge to boycott such people forever #PahalgamTerroristAttack.”

Dear Hindus

Jaat ke naam pe batoge
Toh Dharm ke naam pe katoge

Telling you this as an Indian Muslim

Jo tumhe jaati me baante – take a pledge
to boycott such people forever #PahalgamTerroristAttack

— Shehzad Jai Hind (Modi Ka Parivar) (@Shehzad_Ind) April 23, 2025

Muslim worker removed from temple job by right-wing group

In a disturbing manifestation of the heightened communal tensions, a Muslim youth named Shahid reportedly faced the abrupt termination of his employment at a temple. The sole reason cited for his dismissal was his religious identity, with the tragic incident in Pahalgam being used as a pretext. Shahid’s case starkly illustrates the insidious reach of communal prejudice, where an individual’s established work within a place of worship became irrelevant in the face of generalised suspicion directed towards an entire community.

A user while sharing the video of incident, wrote o X that “Hindus are no longer in a mood to tolerate. After #PahalgamTerrorAttack, an economic boycott has begun, removing them from business and labour roles. Finally, Hindus are uniting”

Hindus are no longer in a mood to tolerate. After #PahalgamTerrorAttack, an economic boycott has begun, removing them from business and labour roles.

Finally Hindus are uniting pic.twitter.com/E6CylqrTlj

— Voice of Hindus (@Warlock_Shubh) April 24, 2025

Indore doctor refused to treat a Muslim patient in response to the Pahalgam attack

The ripple effects of the Pahalgam terror attack tragically extended into the realm of healthcare, as evidenced by a deeply concerning incident in Madhya Pradesh’s Indore. Dr. Neha Arora Verma, a medical professional, reportedly refused to treat a Muslim patient, explicitly citing the terror attack as the reason for her denial. The doctor went so far as to share a screenshot of her message, in which she callously informed the Muslim woman, “I’m sorry, we are no longer taking any patients at our centre.”

This act of blatant discrimination, seemingly motivated by collective punishment and prejudice, highlights the dangerous ways in which fear and communal animosity can permeate even essential services like healthcare.

In #MadhyaPradesh‘s #Indore, a doctor refused to treat a #Muslim patient in response to the #PahalgamTerrorAttack.

Dr. Neha Arora Verma shared a screenshot of her message in which she declined to consult a Muslim woman, stating, “I’m sorry, we are no longer taking any patients… pic.twitter.com/H9i2twYiE7

— Hate Detector (@HateDetectors) April 28, 2025

While Dr. Verma subsequently deleted the post, the initial message served as a stark and disturbing illustration of how the aftermath of a terror attack can be shamefully exploited to deny fundamental rights based solely on religious identity, further fracturing the social fabric of the community.

Hate banners surface in Punjabi Bagh calling for economic boycott

Shockingly, hate-filled boycott banners have surfaced in Punjabi Bagh, openly targeting an entire community and inciting economic ostracisation. This blatant display of prejudice, in a public space, sends a chilling message, fostering an atmosphere of fear and distrust. The banners represent more than just isolated incidents; they are a symptom of a larger, more insidious problem.

Adding fuel to the already raging online propaganda advocating for the economic boycott of Muslims in the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror attack, a right-wing organisation identifying as Sanatan Hindu Ekta Vichar Manch amplified this divisive rhetoric on X. Their post explicitly called for a sweeping boycott, urging followers to “Boycott everything from which even one rupee goes to terrorists or has the possibility of going,” before listing a wide array of targets including “Films, Tourism, Hotel business, Street vendors, Shops, Building material, Anything at all.”

हर उस चीज का वहिष्कार करो जिसमें से एक रुपए भी आतंकियों को जाता हो या जाने की संभावना हो
चाहे फिल्म हो
पर्यटन हो
होटल व्यवसाय हो
रेहड़ी पटरी हो
दुकान हो
बिल्डिंग मैटर हो
।
कुछ भी हो #BoycottDotandKey #छलनी_हिंदू_आत्मा#PahalgamTerroristAttack pic.twitter.com/i3HlSaGzNG

— सनातन हिंदू एकता विचार मंच (@SanatnEktaMunch) April 24, 2025

Inflammatory Speech by VHP leader in Alibaug

Chetan Patel, the Raigad district president of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), delivered a deeply troubling speech during a gathering in Raigad, Alibaug. In his address, Patel called for the social and economic boycott of Muslims, labelled secular-minded individuals as “worms” who must be crushed, and encouraged the use of violence and public humiliation against those advocating communal harmony. Referring to the situation as a “dharma yudh” (religious war), he invoked dangerous communal imagery, urging Hindus to tighten economic controls and sever ties with minorities. His statements not only vilified an entire community but also encouraged vigilantism and collective punishment, striking at the very foundations of India’s constitutional commitment to secularism and equality.

Following the circulation of the video on social media, several concerned citizens raised complaints against Patel, highlighting the incendiary and divisive nature of his remarks. In response to mounting backlash, Patel issued a video apology, attempting to limit the scope of his comments by claiming they were directed solely at those supporting terrorism and foreign forces. He further stated that his intention was to preserve communal harmony in Alibaug. However, his original speech remains deeply problematic: it normalised hate speech, promoted unlawful actions like economic boycotts and violence, and severely undermined efforts to foster peace and unity. Even the subsequent apology fails to meaningfully address the dangerous consequences of the original call to action, which risked legitimising discrimination and communal violence in an already volatile environment.

Transcript of the violent derogatory speech:

“In Alibaug, the town of ‘dead’ Hindus, to see so many of you gathered, I feel happy. Every time, instead of acting, we sit at home and curse some Salim, Maqdoom, or whoever, blaming them. Don’t blame them. Spot and single out the ‘secular worms’ among us, in our society, in your society — get them, crush them.”

“These are the people who have taken on the mantle (the vakalatnama) and constantly say, “All Muslims are not like this,” and so on. Catch hold of them and ask them: who gave you this vakalatnama? If we want this to end, we must first crush these ‘secular worms’ among us. Single them out. Socially boycott them. If they are making these arguments anywhere, slap them, fling cow dung on them. This has to stop. Until this stops, such incidents will continue happening.”

“Most critically, cut off their economic lifeline. This started during the Nagpur riots. Things in Nagpur are hawa tight (they have been taught a lesson). It has started in Nashik too. I know that in Alibaug squeezing them economically is tougher, but we must try and crush them economically.”

“Every rupee you spend on their business will be used against you. No one was asked over there whether you are Agri, Mali, or of any particular caste. They were simply asked to read the kalma, their pants were stripped, and then they were shot dead. They attacked only Hindus. Make them feel ashamed.”

“From tomorrow itself, when you are purchasing anything, at least practice an economic boycott. (Claps from five or six people.) Ask the names of those you are buying from. Until this starts, every month we will be meeting here for a shradhanjali (condolence meeting).”

“If we want to escape this cycle, economic boycott is the way. Every path has its method — not every person needs to brandish a sword. This should not be announced publicly, but it must sometimes be said. All of you assembled here — spread this message to your neighbours.”

“Purchasers too: look at whom you are buying from. If he is giving it for two rupees less, why can’t you? Start this. Tighten their economic strings. Squeeze them. Start now.”

“Cursing PM Modi or any Prime Minister or Home Minister every morning is not enough. This is a dharma yudh (religious war). Understand the 350-year-old history. Stand united, or else we will be chopped like potatoes and onions!”

“Forget brotherhood and harmony. A person who is not a brother to his own cousin sister, how can he be a brother to you?”

“Be ready for war. Economic boycott is the only way.” (Claps; around 15 onlookers present.)

Transcript of the apology:

“Namaskar. Jai Shri Ram. A video of mine has gone viral on social media. In order to prevent any misuse or misunderstanding, I wish to clarify that my words and opinions were not directed against any patriotic Indian citizen. They were aimed solely at those who, directly or indirectly, support the heinous act that took place in Pahalgam on April 22. My words were against those forces — from Pakistan, Bangladesh, or individuals associated with them — who should not be economically empowered. In my peaceful Alibaug, nothing should happen to disturb political, communal, or inter-religious harmony. It is with this intent that I am issuing this second video statement. If any Indian citizen’s religious sentiments have been hurt by my previous statement, I sincerely apologise. Jai Hind.”

The digital firestorm following the Pahalgam terror attack has tragically ignited real-world flames of discrimination. Online calls for economic boycotts against Muslim businesses, amplified by right-wing groups and reflected in localised protests like the one in Dombivli, have chillingly materialised into tangible acts of prejudice. The assault on Muslim hawkers in Dadar by BJP workers, explicitly targeting their religious identity, and the discriminatory dismissal of a Muslim youth from his temple job, alongside the denial of medical care to a Muslim patient in Indore, paint a grim picture of collective punishment and eroding social trust.

Related

‘End discriminatory regimes of colonial era,’ SC declares provisions of State Prison Manuals unconstitutional

SC asks States to improve prison conditions, address the issue of overcrowding in prisons in its latest rebuke to States for not following its previous directives effectively

Indian Prison Condition and Monitoring

The post Echoes of Hate: Online anti-Muslim hate spreads against Muslim businesses and workers after Pahalgam attack appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The attack in #Pahalgam was strongly condemned from several mosques across #JammuAndKashmir.

Imams called the killing of tourists inhuman and against the teachings of Islam. They prayed for the victims and demanded justice.#PahalgamTerroristAttack #PahalgamTerrorAttack pic.twitter.com/ktWmnUBxqt

— Hate Detector (@HateDetectors) April 23, 2025

This immediate reaction –news came in by 3 p.m. Tuesday, April 22— of the Muslim community in the Rajouri district in Jammu and Kashmir opening doors of mosques to accommodate the tourists from different parts stranded due to closure of Jammu following the attack.

As immediate humanitarian assistance, the Pahalgam Anantnag Tourist Stand Association President extends support, offering blood and cash assistance to needy tourists.

Pahalgam Anantnag Tourist Stand Association President extends support, offering blood and cash assistance to needy tourists. #PahalgamAttack #TouristSupport #Kashmir #kashmirattack #Pahalgam pic.twitter.com/iL6cv8Zjxo

— Kashmir Outlook (@kashmiroutlook1) April 22, 2025

Locals also held a candlelight vigil late evening Tuesday expressing their anger, distress and condemnation of the senseless killings

Pahalgam Attack: Locals Hold Candlelight March pic.twitter.com/a1yAJB550K

— Kashmir Life (@KashmirLife) April 22, 2025

This is our teaching of Islam unlike you all who always celebrated our misery. Muslim of Pahalgam protesting the terror attack

This is our teaching of Islam unlike you all who always celebrated our misery.
Muslim of Pahalgam protesting. #PahalgamTerrorAttack
pic.twitter.com/EwXNBsWYKa

— Adv Rukhsana Sayed (@Umm_e_meerann) April 22, 2025

Here are more visuals of the people of Pahalgam condemning terror attack.

Kashmiri media

April 23, dawn, and several prominent newspapers in Kashmir on Wednesday printed their front pages black to protest the brutal terrorist attack that left 26 people, mostly tourists, dead in the Pahalgam hill resort the previous day. The striking act of protest by the newspapers, each bearing powerful headlines in white or red, was a powerful public display of solidarity and grief, symbolising the collective sorrow felt by the residents and the media over the inhuman act. Editorials too were unequivocal, read here.

Besides, on April 23, all of the Valley was shut down completely in grief and condemnation. This followed a call by business and travel trade bodies across the Valley that made the announcement within hours of receiving news of the attack. They announced a complete shutdown on Wednesday to condemn the attack. This has been described as one of the deadliest attacks on civilians in recent years, sending shockwaves through the region and sparking national outrage. The shutdown had been jointly called by the Chamber of Commerce and Industries Kashmir (CCIK), Jammu and Kashmir Hoteliers Club (JKHC), All Travel Associations, transporters, restaurant owners, and various civil society organizations.

Indian Muslims, religious and others condemn Pahalgam attack

By Wednesday afternoon, over a dozen religious leaders and other organisations had condemned the attack.

Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) and Indian Muslims for Secular Democracy (IMSD) among others have also strongly condemned the heinous terrorist targeting of tourists near Pahalgam in the Kashmir valley, killing 26 innocents and injuring several others on April 22. “We join all fellow Indians in offering our heartfelt condolences to the family and friends of the deceased. And call upon the central and state governments to ensure urgent and adequate compensation for the loss of precious lives and proper treatment of the injured.” The rest of the statement from civil society may be read here.

Syed Sadatullah Husaini, President, Jamaat-e-Islami Hind has strongly condemned the deadly terror attack that took place in Pahalgam, South Kashmir, on Tuesday.” The loss of innocent lives, including foreign tourists, is deeply heart-breaking. My thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their grieving families, his public statement read, adding, “There can be no justification for such a barbaric act. It is completely inhuman and deserves absolute and unequivocal condemnation. Those responsible must be brought to justice and given the harshest punishment.”

I strongly condemn the deadly terror attack that took place in Pahalgam, South Kashmir, on Tuesday. The loss of innocent lives, including foreign tourists, is deeply heartbreaking. My thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their grieving families.

There can be no… pic.twitter.com/lokdbK92gN

— Jamaat-e-Islami Hind (@JIHMarkaz) April 22, 2025

Bengaluru, Karnataka: The Jama Masjid Imam, Maulana Maqsood Iimran Rashadi says, “… This was a cowardly attack. I don’t understand what they (attackers) want to prove by doing such acts. This is Hindustan and we love Hindustan… We strongly condemn this terrorist attack on tourists, and strongly appeal to the government to punish these terrorists in such a way that no other terrorist dares to attack like this. They (terrorists) should be hanged in public… Islam does not allow such acts…”

#WATCHB | #PahalgamTerrorAttack | Bengaluru, Karnataka | Jama Masjid Imam, Maulana Maqsood Iimran Rashadi says, “… This was a cowardly attack. I don’t understand what they (attackers) want to prove by doing such acts. This is Hindustan and we love Hindustan… We strongly… pic.twitter.com/Gpsig3BvwH

— ANI (@ANI) April 23, 2025

“I strongly Condom Pahalgam Terror Attack, said Maulana Sayed Moinuddin Ashraf (Moin Miyan) President All India Sunni Jamiatul Olama.”

We Strongly Condom Pahalgam Terror Attack. Said Maulana Sayed Moinuddin Ashraf (Moin Miyan) President All India Sunni Jamiatul Olama. #maulanasayedmoinuddinashraf #moinemillat #MoinMiyan #allindiasunnijamiatulolama #pehalgam pic.twitter.com/IlpEAsKsEH

— MD RASHID (@MDRASHI08328411) April 23, 2025

Also, the Lucknow Eidgah Imam, Maulana Khalid Rasheed Farangi Mahali said in response to the Pahalgam terror attack, “We condemn in the strongest possible words the terrorist attack in Pahalgam. Today, we have organised a special prayer by students at Darul Uloom Firangi Mahal, Lucknow and Shaheen Academy. We demand that the Indian government ensure that the killers are punished severely. We appeal to the people of Pahalgam to maintain peace and communal harmony.”

#WATCH | Lucknow Eidgah Imam, Maulana Khalid Rasheed Farangi Mahali says, “We condemn in the strongest possible words the terrorist attack in Pahalgam. Today, we have organised a special prayers by students at Darul Uloom Firangi Mahal, Lucknow and Shaheen Academy. We demand… pic.twitter.com/PCSUUWPYIV

— ANI (@ANI) April 23, 2025

Other individual condemnations

The cricketer Mohammed Siraj called for terrorists to be punished without mercy: ‘Yeh kaisi ladai hai…,’ he is reported to have said.

The Ahmadiyya Muslim community, India has also expressed its anguish and “offered its deepest sympathies and heartfelt prayers to the victims and their grieving families. In their statement, they said, “Innocent lives lost to senseless violence is a tragedy for all of humanity. Islam strictly forbids all forms of terrorism and compels Muslims to uphold peace, justice, and the sanctity of life. The Holy Qur’an states: “Whosoever killed a person… it shall be as if he had killed all mankind.” (5:33) We stand united with our fellow citizens in this moment of grief and urge the authorities to bring the perpetrators of this inhumane act swiftly to justice. May India remain a land of peace, compassion, and unity for people of all faiths and backgrounds.

We strongly condemn the cowardly and barbaric terrorist attack in Pahalgam.

The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, India offers its deepest sympathies and heartfelt prayers to the victims and their grieving families. Innocent lives lost to senseless violence is a tragedy for all of… pic.twitter.com/CNqkSvPklb

— Islam in India (@islaminind) April 22, 2025

Related:

Indian Muslims, others, condemn the heinous massacre of tourists near Pahalgam, Kashmir

The post Muslims in Kashmir & across India strongly condemn Pahalgam terror attack appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In a statement issues today representatives of these organisations have said,

“We join all fellow Indians in offering our heartfelt condolences to the family and friends of the deceased. And call upon the central and state governments to ensure urgent and adequate compensation for the loss of precious lives and proper treatment of the injured.

“According to some reports, The Resistance Front (TRF), a shadow group of the banned Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) terror group, has claimed responsibility for the strike.

“We hope that the perpetrators are swiftly apprehended, brought to justice and handed severe punishments.

“IMSD, Bebak Collective, BMMA, CSSS and Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) have always opposed any targeting of innocent civilians anywhere, irrespective of the cause offered as justification for such savagery.

“The terror attack hits at the heart of the Valley’s tourism centre, Pahalgam, putting a big question mark on claims of “return of normalcy”.

“The latest mass killing raises disturbing questions about the failure of security agencies in ensuring adequate cover in and around Pahalgam, among the obvious targets of terrorist groups.

“We demand a thorough enquiry into such a grievous security lapse, fixing of responsibility and necessary action.

“Meanwhile, in this moment of grief and anguish, we are heartened by the humanity displayed by the average Kashmiri Muslim. On Wednesday (April 23) the entire Valley observed a complete bandh: shopkeepers, traders, transporters. Reports across Kashmir of Mosques opening their doors to assist distraught tourists are pouring in as are reports of open condemnations from the Mosques calling this terror attack an attack on humanity itself.

“Kashmiri newspapers have in their editorials and front pages, editorially and visually conveyed the message that this is a day of mourning for the lives lost. We urge all media, especially the television channels to objectively report the developments and not slide into any provocative coverage

“We call upon all Indians irrespective of religion to emulate the fine example of communal amity displayed by ordinary Kashmiri Muslims.”

Signatories:

Javed Anand, Convenor, IMSD

Hasina Khan, Bebaak Collective

Irfan Engineer, Director, Centre for Study of Society and Secularism (CSSS)

Teesta Setalvad, Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP)

Zakia Soman, Co-Convenor, Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan (BMMA)

Zeenat Shaukatali, Director General, Wisdom Foundation

Related:

Indians & Kashmiris alike, Muslims strongly condemn Pahalgam terror attack

The post Indian Muslims, others, condemn the heinous massacre of tourists near Pahalgam, Kashmir appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The United Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency, and Development (UMEED) Bill 2024, introduced by the ruling BJP-led Union government, has now been referred to the Joint Committee of Parliament (JCP) for further examination. Upon reviewing the draft Bill and observing reactions from the Opposition, media, and academics, it becomes evident that a crucial aspect is missing from the discourse. The responses from Muslim organisations follow a familiar pattern: an outright rejection of reforms deemed as religious matters, coupled with a resistance to any state intervention aimed at reforming these areas. This has been the typical stance on issues like Muslim Personal Law, Muslim University governance, and Waqf administration.

This reaction necessitates an intervention to bring forth a broader perspective.

The scope of the flawed bill

The proposed Bill ostensibly addresses the management and mismanagement of Waqf properties, rather than delving into the theological or historical legitimacy of Waqf as an institution. It seeks to address concerns about the assets held under Waqf, the proceeds they generate, and the persistent corruption within the Waqf administration. However, some Opposition leaders seem to be treating the Waqf Bill in the same way as they have treated other religious matters, such as the Shariat Act of 1937 and the governance of Aligarh Muslim University (AMU).

It is important to clarify that, regardless of the Supreme Court’s upcoming verdict on AMU’s minority status, structural reforms in the governance of AMU will remain unresolved. For instance, the AMU will still have a preponderance (over 80%) of membership of the internal teachers in the Executive Council. In all these cases, there exists a widely held belief within all Muslim communities that the state should not interfere, that no reforms should emerge from within the community, and that these matters are divinely ordained and therefore immutable. This belief perpetuates a sense of Muslim exceptionalism, exclusivity, and isolation from the state.

Both the government and the Opposition appear to be engaging in the usual “vote-bank politics”, addressing their respective constituencies based on identity. This approach has already caused significant harm to India’s Muslim communities, due to the bizarre stance of their own self-serving elites as well as the ruling and intellectual elites of the country. It is crucial for ordinary Muslims to be informed by their theological and secular institutions (such as Deoband, Nadwah, Aligarh Muslim University, Jamia Millia Islamia, and MANU Hyderabad) that Waqf, arguably, does not have explicit Quranic or Shariah mandates. Imam Abu Hanifa (699-767) also didn’t approve of it as an institution indisputably and explicitly sanctioned by Sharia. Waqf-e-Aam and Waqf-e-Aulad (types of Waqf) are often more about circumventing Quranic inheritance rules and preventing division among heirs than about altruism and charity and public welfare. They are not divinely ordained.

The historical context of Waqf

In the latter half of the 19th century, Waqf in India became a means to fund identity politics and secure representation in colonial governance institutions. Gregory Kozlowski’s 1985 book, Muslim Endowments and Society in British India, highlights that most Waqfs in India emerged during this period when the colonial state turned land into a commodity. Sir Syed Ahmad Khan (1817-1898), a visionary pragmatist, was aware of both the British Indian judges’ concerns about Waqf-e-Aulad (Waqf for descendants) and the self-interests of the Muslim landed aristocracy. British judges rightly saw Waqf-e-Aulad as circumvention of Quranic inheritance laws and in their judgments invalidated many of these Waqfs, as they lacked charitable elements. This is why they kept invalidating such Awqaf, annoying the Muslim landed elites turning into Waqifs.

Sir Syed therefore, proposed a middle path. In 1879 –as member of the Viceroy’s Legislative council– he introduced a draft bill advocating that Waqf properties be used also for more meaningful and tangible charitable purposes such as education, healthcare, and social welfare, not just for mosques and madrasas. He argued that if managed properly, Waqf could be a powerful tool for social change and community development, brings out Prof. Shafey Kidwai’s column (India Today, August 13, 2024). Sir Syed’s proposal was also published in 1877 in his periodical Tehzibul Akhlaq, with the title, ‘A Proposal for Salvaging Muslim Families from Extinction and Destruction’. This was vehemently opposed by orthodox Muslims who saw the insistence on charity and public welfare as an innovation (bidat). As a result, Sir Syed succumbing to the conservatives and orthodoxy withdrew the bill.

In contrast, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the cunning politician, by the second decade of the 19th century, jumped in to protect the interests of the Muslim landed elites who needed the Waqf Validation Act of 1913. This act, supported by the colonial state, aimed to safeguard the landed assets of these elites, who were seen as potential allies against the growing anti-colonial movement. The Swadeshi Movement, which opposed the religious-communal partition of Bengal, had forced the colonial state to annul the (Bengal) partition in 1911-192, necessitating a political arrangement to secure Muslim support.

Such a political arrangement to safeguard the monopoly on landed assets is equally true for the Mahanths and their Mutths .Unfortunately this institution of Mahanths and Maths remains under-explored by the historians of peasant and agrarian relations. Prakash Jha’s film Mrityudand (1997) attempts to depict some of the degenerative aspects of the institution of Mahanth, but it eventually turned more into a melodramatic movie.

The BJP has got no intent of introducing a similar Bill to reform this Hindu institution of Mahanths’ Muths? This is therefore an additional reason why Muslim communities look upon the proposed Bill with alarming concern, as it creates an impression of targeting only Muslims with discriminatory treatment. One more apprehension is, turning the Bill into a tool to harass Muslims by local majoritarian forces and outfits in those smaller villages and mohallas where written deeds of a Waqf and mosques aren’t available.

The nature of Waqf: Neither divine nor immutable

Waqf is not the exact equivalent of charitable endowments in the “Christian” West. In many cases, as said earlier, it is a means of circumventing Quranic inheritance regulations. Just as the community’s elites have misled others into believing that Shariat is divinely ordained, Waqf has also been portrayed as an immutable, divinely sanctioned institution. This deception needs to be exposed for the greater common good.

Moreover, the looting and encroachment of Waqf assets have been a recurring issue across the Islamic world since the 7th century AD. This mismanagement occurred with the earliest prominent Waqfs, such as Khyber and Sawad (Iraq) during Caliph Umar’s time, and the Rumlah (Palestine) Waqf established in 912 AD by a person named Faíq (which has earliest surviving written record-stone inscription). All three “earliest” Waqf estates have since become non-existent, as their assets were looted by military and other elites!

Waqf mismanagement and loot

The looting of Waqf assets is almost as old as the institution itself. In India, there is a consensus that Waqf properties suffer from gross mismanagement and looting. Despite numerous legislations, the loot continues unabated. The existing laws, therefore, require a thorough re-examination. Unfortunately, neither the ruling party nor the Opposition has highlighted this consensus in the Lok Sabha, in media, or in academic debates. The near silence of academics from institutions like AMU and JMI on this matter is particularly notable.

The “Muslim-friendly” “secular” Opposition refrains from addressing Waqf loot because doing so would justify the need for the Bill. This also explains why their interventions in the Lok Sabha are superficial and merely rhetorical. The Opposition cannot afford to state frankly that Waqf is not divine and requires human intervention for reform in order to prevent its loot and redirect it for the welfare and empowerment of the Muslim communities.

Academics, theologians and other knowledge elites have been shallow in their interventions. They have not voiced the concerns and apprehensions they discuss privately about the implications of the proposed Bill. The Muslim community needs to see through this politics, not only of the politicians but also of their own knowledge elites. Why aren’t these academics helping legislators and the community understand the issue in a holistic manner?

The real threat posed by the Bill is to the elites within the Muslim community. The proposed Bill challenges the exclusive Muslim representation in Waqf Boards as mandated by Section/clause 14 of the Waqf Act of 1995. This section, which deals with the social composition of Board Executives, is being questioned in the new Bill. The provision for Muslim-exclusive privileges in Waqf representation is being removed, which is a significant point of concern, alarm and contention. Another alarming concern is the proposal to do away with the enabling provisions enshrined in section 40 of the Waqf Act, 1995. It gives powers to the Board to acquire, issue notices or hold an enquiry into the ownership of the property that it has reasons to believe belongs to the Waqf.

Proposed reforms

While the proposed Bill has its deep flaws, the lack of detailed articulation by its opponents hinders constructive debate. Historically, state intervention has sometimes yielded positive results, as seen in the Mohsin Waqf of Hooghly, where the British colonial state established the Mohsin Hooghly College in 1836, going beyond the original terms of the original Waqf. The Waqf Bill of 2024 should explicitly incorporate such progressive steps. Parliament should legislate to ensure Waqf Boards take similar rewarding actions.

Muslim communities must abandon their collective hypocrisy. For instance, the practices, such as Instant Triple Talaq (ITT), are un-Quranic yet they stubbornly refuse to reform themselves as much as they resist the state intervention. Despite, Ali Miyan Nadvi’s assurance to the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, the AIMPLB refuses to provide for maintenance to divorced Muslim women. They keep opposing the Supreme Court verdicts in this regard.  Likewise, adoption of a child is not prohibited by Quran (it only prohibits concealing the biological paternity of the child adopted) and custody is absolutely valid as was the case with Zayd the adopted son of the Prophet Muhammad, yet, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) refuses to reform it. Their stubbornness is immensely supported by most of the academics of the modern institutions such as the AMU and JMI. Political leaders like Akhilesh Yadav, Asaduddin Owaisi, and the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) must take a clear stand on this issue.

Some Tentative Recommendations for the Waqf Bill 2024

1. Creation of a Waqf Tribunal: Establish a tribunal consisting of judges of the rank of High Court judges as the exclusive body for resolving Waqf cases, with the Supreme Court as the appellate authority.
2. Enhanced Land Survey: A Land Survey Commissioner should be comprised of at least three officers in each Board.
3. Mandatory Gender and Caste Representation: The Waqf Board’s composition should be diversified and this should be made mandatory (with Muslims of all castes and women as members).
4. Digital Transparency: Waqf assets, deeds, and real estate records should be digitized and made publicly accessible online for transparency and vigilance.
5. Promotion of Charitable Activities: The Bill should mandate that Waqf properties be used aggressively for establishing modern educational and research institutions, especially quality residential schools under Article 30 of the Constitution.
6. Strict Penalties for Mismanagement: Penalties for those who grab, usurp or mismanage Waqf properties should not be diluted. Rigorous imprisonment should be enforced.
7. Memorialization of Waqf Creators: Waqf creators (Waqif) should be remembered in a befitting manner, be honored, and their deeds digitized and made publicly available.
8. Defined Roles for Mutawallis: The roles of Mutawallis (Waqf administrators) should be clearly defined, with fixed tenures of 3-5 years. Eligibility criteria should be established for their appointment.
9. Accountability Mechanisms: A robust check and balance mechanism should be implemented for both Mutawallis and Waqf Boards.
10. Mandatory annual auditing, and the income of the Waqf Boards should be made available for public vigilance.

Hope, the stakeholders would listen to the above words!

(The author is a Professor of History, Aligarh Muslim University)

The post The Waqf Bill 2024: An Open Letter to the Joint Committee of Parliament, the Opposition, and India’s Muslim Communities appeared first on SabrangIndia.

1. The Quranic Concept of Justice (ʿAdl)

The Quran repeatedly emphasizes the importance of justice (ʿadl) as a fundamental virtue in Islam (Q.4:135, 5:8). The Quranic notion of justice extends beyond divine law (Sharia) to include human rights, social equality, and individual freedoms (Q.5:32, 17:70). The Quran warns against favouritism (Q.4:58) and emphasizes the protection of marginalized groups (Q.4:75). Secular democracy, with its emphasis on the rule of law, equality before the law, and the separation of powers, is better equipped to ensure justice in this comprehensive sense.

2. Human Freedom and Agency (Ikhtiyar)

The Quran emphasizes human freedom and agency (Q.18:29, 76:3), affirming that “no soul is burdened with more than it can bear” (Q.2:286). The Quran’s statement that “there is no compulsion in religion” (Q.2:256) reinforces the principle of voluntary belief. Secular democracy protects individual liberties and allows citizens to make choices about their own lives, in alignment with this Quranic recognition of human agency.

3. Rational Inquiry and Critical Thinking (Ijtihad)

The Quran encourages rational inquiry and critical thinking (ijtihad), urging believers to reflect on creation and investigate truth (Q.38:29, 49:6). Theocratic systems often suppress critical inquiry in favour of dogmatic adherence to religious authority. Secular democracy, with its protection of intellectual freedom and public debate, fosters the Quranic principle of reflection and investigation.

4. Separation of Powers and Prevention of Tyranny

The Quran warns against the concentration of power and the dangers of tyranny (Q.27:34). The principle of shura (mutual consultation, Q.42:38) emphasizes collective decision-making and power-sharing, essential to democratic governance. Secular democracy’s system of checks and balances is a safeguard against authoritarianism and power abuse.

5. Freedom of Religion and Conscience

The Quran unequivocally upholds religious freedom, stating “There is no compulsion in religion” (Q.2:256) and acknowledging belief and disbelief as part of human nature (Q.10:99, Q.109:6). Secular democracy, by protecting religious expression without privileging any faith, aligns closely with this Quranic vision.

6. Accountability and Moral Responsibility

The Quran emphasizes individual moral accountability (Q.6:164) and asserts that no individual can bear the burden of another’s sins (Q.17:15). Secular democracy allows individuals to exercise their moral agency freely, reflecting this Quranic principle of personal responsibility.

7. Pluralism and Social Diversity

The Quran affirms diversity as part of divine wisdom (Q.49:13) and acknowledges that God “could have made you one community” but created diversity as a test in righteousness (Q.5:48). This aligns with secular democracy’s principles of protecting minority rights and promoting inclusivity.

8. Moral and Ethical Guidance in Politics

The Quran provides a moral framework for leadership, prioritizing justice, compassion, and the protection of the vulnerable (Q.4:58, 6:165, 28:5). Secular democracy, with its emphasis on ethical leadership, reflects these Quranic values without imposing religious dogma.

9. Historical Context and Flexibility

The Quranic verses addressing governance emerged in specific historical contexts, underscoring the Quran’s adaptability to changing circumstances. The Quran encourages ijtihad (intellectual exertion) to develop context-specific solutions rooted in justice and fairness (Q.5:8, 42:38). Secular democracy’s flexibility aligns with this Quranic adaptability.

10. Critique of Authoritarianism

The Quran critiques oppressive rulers and warns against those who “divide their people into factions” (Q.28:4) and “spread corruption in the land” (Q.5:33). Secular democracy’s mechanisms for accountability and transparency provide a stronger safeguard against tyranny than theocratic systems.

11. The Real Purpose of Quranic Revelation

The Quran’s guidance encompasses social relationships, economic dealings, and personal conduct, emphasizing justice, equality, and compassion (Q.4:58, 5:8, 16:90). These values are best realized in a secular democratic system that ensures individual freedoms and impartial governance.

12. Denial of Coercion as an Ought

The Quran asserts that “there is no compulsion in religion” (Q.2:256) and emphasizes human agency and free will (Q.67:2). Enforcing Sharia law compels individuals to adhere to prescribed rules, undermining the Quranic purpose of human existence as a test of free will. Secular democracy provides a framework that upholds religious freedom and individual autonomy.

Fulfilling the Quran’s Promise

The Quranic principles of consultation, justice, freedom of religion, protection of minorities, and the separation of religious and political authority provide a strong foundation for a secular polity. By promoting inclusivity, accountability, and individual agency, the Quran aligns with the core values of secularism. Secular democracy amplifies the Quranic vision of a just and equitable society, ensuring governance guided by ethical principles rather than sectarian interests. Embracing secularism allows Muslims to honour the Quran’s timeless message and contribute to a world where justice, compassion, and individual freedoms prevail.

(V.A. Mohamad Ashrof is an independent Indian scholar specializing in Islamic humanism. With a deep commitment to advancing Quranic hermeneutics that prioritize human well-being, peace, and progress, his work aims to foster a just society, encourage critical thinking, and promote inclusive discourse and peaceful coexistence. He is dedicated to creating pathways for meaningful social change and intellectual growth through his scholarship. He can be reached at vamashrof@gmail.com)

Courtesy: New Age Islam

The post Why Quranic Principles Advocate Secular Democracy Over Theocracy? Part 1 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The agitated Muslim community, which is at the receiving end of the state government’s ire as well as the Hindutva brigade led by the Sangh Parivar, staged a protest on March 4, 2025, in front of the office of the Dehradun District Magistrate, terming the administrative action as “draconian, undemocratic and unconstitutional.” The protest was led by the local unit of the Jammiat-Ulema-E Hind and Muslim Sewa Sangathan. The protesters courted arrest and were later let off by the police from police lines.

On instructions from Chief Minister Dhami, the state administration started action against ‘Madrassas’ and sealed five of them and giving notices to six others in village Dhakrani and Nawabgarh in Vikasnagar tehsil of Dehradun district and in Dehradun city as well. A mosque at Dhakrani has also been sealed off.

A team of local civil administration, Mussoorie Dehradun Development Authority (MDDA) and State Madrassa Board led by Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) Vinod Kumar, had been raiding ‘Madrassas’ in Vikasnagar tehsil since March 1, 2025 leading to resentment amongst minority community.

The action comes in the backdrop of Chief Minister Dhami threatening action against Madrassas which, he claimed, were “running illegally”. Vinod Kumar, SDM, Vikasnagar, told the media that action had been taken against those Madrassas that were not registered with the state Madrassa Board or built without getting the map passed from the competent authorities.

Nayeem Quraishy, president, Muslim Sewa Sangathan, told reporters that the action by the administration was “unwarranted and without any prior notice”.

A memorandum addressed to the District Magistrate stated that the administrative action was a clear violation of guarantees provided under Article 29 and 30 of the Constitution for professing, propagating and teaching of religious studies.

Quraishy further said that the administration’s assertion of to seal the Madrassas not affiliated with Uttarakhand Madrassa Board was unlawful.

“These Madrassas are being run under the Societies Registration Act and Trusts and do not require affiliation with a government-managed institution. Interestingly, no legal order has been given for such sealing. The civil administration is passing the buck to MDDA, and we will start a protest against MDDA on Wednesday,” said Quraishy.

The recent onslaught on Madrassas is not new as since the advent of the BJP government in 2017,  there have been continuous attacks on Muslim and their institutions throughout the state. Chief Minister Dhami has himself spearheaded a campaign against the so-called ‘Love Jehad’, ‘Land Jehad’, ‘Mazar Jehad’ and ‘Thook Jehad’ since 2021.

The action against Madrassas was preceded by several anti-Muslim threats. Last week, Hindu Rakshak Dal, a Hindu outfit, suddenly announced to publicly recite the Hanuman Chalisa in front of the Dehradun Jama Masjid as they claimed that a two-minute Azaan (call to prayers) from the mosque was “disturbing” the general public.  The Hindu group was stopped by the police from approaching the mosque, and a case was registered on the complaint of the Muslim Sewa Sangathan, but no one was arrested.

Three weeks ago, on an alleged complaint of eve-teasing, members of an outfit called the Hindu Kali Sena publicly threatened a Muslim living and doing business in Nathuwala, near Doiwala. They allegedly smashed bill boards of Muslim-owned shops giving them an ultimatum to leave the area. A case was registered by the police and none has been arrested. Some out of the 30-odd Muslim families there have reportedly left the area out of fear.

In another case, Muslims of Raiwala, who had been performing Namaz at Prateek Nagar area since 1989, said they were asked by the Naib Tehsildar, Raiwala, to stop the prayers.

Abdul Aziz and Abdul Mazid, both managing the mosque, said they got notices on December 24, 2024, to stop the prayers. In their reply, they informed the SDM, Rishikesh, that Muslims had been holding prayers since 1989 at that place as per their constitutional right. Giving the reference of the Supreme Court judgement in Mohd. Sharif Versus state of UP and others delivered on January 28, 1999, the petitioner stated that stopping them from holding prayers in the mosque violated their fundamental right to pray, but to no avail.

Interestingly, since 2017, there have been a dozen verbal announcements by respective BJP Chief Ministers, including the present incumbent Dhami, of conducting a ‘survey’ of Madarassas.  After conducting such exercises countless times with the help of police and intelligence outfits since 2017, the outcome has not been made public.

The state government has not elaborated the reasons for such a proposed exercise, which has led the Muslim community to believe that the aim is “vilification and targeting” of the minority community.

The writer is a freelancer based in Dehradun, Uttarakhand.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Uttarakhand: Relentless Anti-Muslim Campaign Continues in Holy Month of Ramzan appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP), which has long acted as a safeguarding organisation of human rights of the citizens of India, is the lead petitioner in the writ petitions, filed in January 2021, challenging anti–conversion laws of various states such as Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh and Himachal Pradesh. Subsequently in additional petitions, anti-conversion laws of Chattisgarh, Gujarat, Haryana, Jharkhand and Karnataka have also been challenged. The draconian laws have been challenged on various grounds such as for violating right to personal liberty and autonomy, right to freedom of speech and expression, right to privacy, freedom of faith, right against discrimination.

CJP has also explored the illusive concept of “love jihad” which is a sectarian concept and against the principles of pluralism and secularism adopted by India. The petition also challenges the law on the grounds of being anti–women and discriminatory against women, as it takes away the agency of women for making decisions of their own lives.

Content of the legislation

The Rajasthan government recently enacted the Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Bill 2024, which aims to stop forced religious conversions and has sparked a lot of debate. Despite the bill’s claimed goal of preventing coerced religious conversion, its harsh provisions—such as 10-year prison sentences and penalties of up to 50,000—raise fundamental questions regarding individual liberties and the possibility of abuse. Critics contend that by targeting particular communities under the pretence of preventing forced conversions, such law not only violates individual liberty but also runs the risk of widening communal disparities. The Bill is available on the website of the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly.

Important Provisions

According to the Bill, religious conversion by compulsion, force, allurement, or deception is primarily considered prohibited. Allurements may include money, material rewards, employment, free education, etc.

As per the Bill, the individual who “caused” the conversion have the duty of proving that the religious conversion was not achieved by fraud, coercion, undue influence, allurement, or any other fraudulent means or methods.

The assumption of innocence principle, which often applies to the accused in a criminal proceeding, is being reversed here.

The offences covered by this Bill are classified as cognisable and non-bailable, which means that the accused may be arrested without a warrant and that obtaining bail may be difficult. Concerns regarding the possibility of misuse and the violation of individual liberties are raised by this classification.

The draft suggests harsh punishments for illegal conversions, such as fines of up to ₹50,000 and jail time of one to ten years. In particular, converting women, children, or members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes can lead to a fine of ₹25,000 and two to ten years in prison. The penalty rises to three to ten years of imprisonment and a fine of ₹50,000 for mass conversions. Repeat offenders would be punished no more than twice the legal penalty for each additional offence. Concerns regarding possible abuse and the targeting of particular communities have been raised due to such severe penalties.

The Bill also includes “conversion by solemnisation of marriage or relationship in the nature of marriage,” in its list of offences.

The Bill states that “Any marriage done for sole purpose of unlawful conversion or vice-versa by the man of one religion with the woman of another religion, either by converting himself/herself before or after marriage, or by converting the woman before or after marriage, shall be declared void by the Family Court or where Family Court is not established, the Court having jurisdiction to try such case on a petition presented by either party.”

As per the Bill, blood relatives have the power to lodge an FIR in a suspected case. It says that, “Any aggrieved person, his/her parents, brother, sister, or any other person who is related to him/her by blood, marriage or adoption may lodge a FIR”.

Authorities are shielded from prosecution or other legal actions for any actions conducted in accordance with the proposed law by Section 13 of the Bill, which is titled “Protection of action taken in good faith.”

The Bill states that “No suit, prosecution, or other legal proceedings shall lie against any authority or officer for anything done in good faith or intended to be done, or purported to be done, or omitted to be done in pursuance of this Act, or any rule or order made thereunder.”

There have been various instances in recent years where members of disadvantaged communities have been wrongfully accused of converting individuals and then acquitted by the courts.

While the Bill protects government officials from potential legal action, it does little to stop instances in which innocent people are targeted after being falsely accused of illegal conversion.

Voluntary conversions

The Bill provides an exhaustive procedure to be followed by individuals who wish to voluntarily convert to another religion.

Individuals who wish to convert to another religion must apply to the district magistrate (DM) at least 60 days before the conversion; failure to do so can result in a minimum fine of Rs 10,000 and a maximum sentence of three years in prison.

Subsequently, the “convertor,” or the one conducting the conversion ceremony, would notify the DM one month in advance via a designated form; failure to do so would result in a minimum punishment of Rs 25,000 and a maximum penalty of five years in prison.

An officer not below the rank of Additional DM will then “have an inquiry conducted through police with regard to the real intention, purpose, and cause of the proposed religious conversion.”

Within 60 days of conversion, the converted individual must submit a declaration to the DM in the required format. Until the date of confirmation, a copy of the declaration must be posted on the DM’s office notice board.

The convert’s date of birth, permanent or current address, father’s or husband’s name, religion before and after conversion, conversion date and location, and other details will be included in this declaration. In order to prove their identification and validate the information in the statement, the convert must then appear before the DM within 21 days of the declaration being filed.

Requirement of the Bill

According to the Bill’s statement of reason, while the constitution guarantees everyone the fundamental right to profess, practise, or propagate their religion, the freedom of conscience and religion cannot be interpreted as a collective right to proselytise; the right to religious freedom is equally applicable to the person seeking conversion as it is to the person converting.

The statement of reasons says that “However, in the recent past many such examples have come to light where gullible persons have been converted from one religion to another by misrepresentation, force, undue influence, coercion, allurement or by fraudulent means. The law related to right to religious freedom already exists in various States of the country but there was no statute on the said subject in Rajasthan.” It further add that “In view of the above, it was decided to enact a law to provide for prohibition of unlawful conversion from one religion to another by misrepresentation, force, undue influence, coercion, allurement or fraudulent means or by marriage and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.”

Ghanshyam Tiwari, a legislator for the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), commended Chief Minister Bhajan Lal Sharma for his “historic decision” to crack down on religious conversions and “love jihad,” a phrase used by right-wing groups to refer to a purported Muslim plot to court Hindu women. The phrase is not recognised by the Union government or courts.

The issue of “love-jihad” and the myth surrounding forced conversions has been discussed in depth in an article published by CJP.

Concerns raised by the Bill

While the Bill proposes to be aimed at preventing forced conversions, various concerns have been raised as the Bill may infringe upon the Fundamental Rights and has a vast potential for misuse.

Article 25 of the Indian Constitution, which protects people’s freedom to openly profess, practise, and propagate their religion, is allegedly violated by the law, according to critics. It is believed that the necessary advance warning and post-conversion statement requirements constitute excessive government meddling in private religious choices.

There are concerns that the bill can be abused to target religious minorities and stifle peaceful religious expression. It has been reported that similar laws have been used in other jurisdictions to harass minority communities while claiming that they are preventing forced conversions.

The requirement that people inform authorities of their intention to convert is seen as a breach of their right to privacy and their freedom. Critics have argued that these clauses might discourage people from exercising their freedom to freely choose and convert to a different religion.

Further, those suspected of unlawful conversion are given the burden of proving their innocence under the bill, which goes against the legal doctrine of “innocent until proven guilty.” This change may result in legal abuse and erroneous convictions.

Authorities that operate “in good faith” under the statute are granted immunity under Section 13 of the bill. Critics contend that the authorities may act without any concerns of consequence because they are protected from legal action, this clause may result in the persecution of innocent people.

Furthermore, the bill gives family courts the authority to deem marriages void if it turns out that they were performed with the intention of committing an illegal conversion. This clause has drawn criticism for presumably violating people’s right to marry and choosing their own religion.

What is the reality of Religious Conversions in India?

While the right–wing government is attempting to introduce legislation governing religious conversions, an important question arises regarding the reality of religious conversions and the threat posed by the same. Is religious conversion a serious issue which requires implementation of a law that could potentially violate fundamental rights, or is it just a Trojan horse being used by the Government to fulfil hidden sinister agendas under the garb of protecting “gullible persons.”

In 2021, the Pew Research Centre released a report titled Religious Composition of India. The Report dealt with the changing religious composition of India and the causes of religious change.

According to the Report, 99% of persons who claim to have been raised as Hindus still identify as such. 97% of those who were raised as Muslims remain Muslims. Additionally, 94% of Indians who grew up as Christians remain Christians. Furthermore, people who change their religions often balance each other out. For instance, of all Indian adults, 0.7% were raised as Hindus but do not identify as such at the moment, while 0.8% were raised outside of the religion but are now Hindu.

Additionally, interfaith marriage is highly uncommon. 99% of married Hindus, 98% of married Muslims, and 95% of married Christians report having a spouse who shares their beliefs, according to the same survey. 92% of Christians and comparable percentages of Muslims and Hindus claim that their spouse was brought up in their present faith.

These findings raise questions about the true intentions of anti-conversion laws and the threat posed by forceful conversions. The false sense of insecurity regarding religion created by right–wing extremists has served merely as a fuel to fan the flames of religious disparities in India.

Conclusion

While the Rajasthan Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Bill, 2025, purports to prevent forced conversions, it actually poses the risk of violating the fundamental rights provided in the Constitution of India. The law fosters an atmosphere that is conducive to abuse by giving officials broad immunity, imposing undue procedural limits on voluntary conversions, and transferring the burden of proof to the accused. It exerts state control over individual faith choices rather than defending religious freedom, disproportionately harming interfaith couples and religious minorities.

Furthermore, the narrative of widespread forced conversions is not supported by empirical data, which raises questions about whether such legislation is merely political ploys rather than providing true protection. In other states, similar legislations have already resulted in increased communal divisions, harassment, and false allegations. Laws such as this divert attention and are a means of policing individual liberty rather than tackling actual socio-economic problems. The government must concentrate on establishing legislative protections that forbid coercion without violating individual liberties if the goal is really to uphold individual rights. Otherwise, this law remains yet another step towards eroding India’s secular and pluralistic fabric.

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

Related:

CJP plea against anti-conversion laws: SC seeks to know status of cases challenging ‘anti conversion’ laws in HCs

CJP’s Love Jihad Petition: SC issues notice to UP and Uttarakhand

CJP moves SC against “Love Jihad” laws

RightsCast: How India’s anti-conversion Laws are linked to the weaponization of the state administration

Curbing Freedom of Faith: India’s Anti-Conversion laws

“Love Jihad” laws curb individual and collective freedoms

2024: Love Jihad as a socio-political tool: caste, endogamy, and Hindutva’s dominance over gender and social boundaries in India

Rising religious polarisation: Tridents symbolise growing communalism in Rajasthan

The post Are Indian anti-conversion laws targeting minorities or protecting the vulnerable? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Take Fatima Sheikh, India’s first Muslim woman teacher. Her life and work alongside Savitribai and Jyotirao Phule embody the very essence of solidarity and resistance. Together, they challenged Brahmanical patriarchy and caste exclusion, striving for an inclusive education system that empowered the most marginalised. Yet there is an ongoing attempt to erase Fatima Sheikh from mainstream history, her legacy buried under layers of casteist and communal erasure. Her erasure is not a mere oversight but a calculated act, one that seeks to deny the very existence of intersectional struggles against oppression.

This politics of erasure is not isolated; it is part of a broader project to sanitise history, neutralise dissent, and normalise inequalities. By excluding figures like Fatima Sheikh, Dalits, Muslims, Adivasis, women, and persons with disabilities are systematically pushed to the margins of public memory and denied their rightful place in the nation’s narrative.

Historical Revisionism: Sanitising the Past for Oppression

The deliberate erasure of figures like Fatima Sheikh reveals a pattern of historical revisionism designed to sustain existing hierarchies. History is manipulated to present reform movements as caste-neutral, male-driven, and Hindu-led, obscuring the intersectional struggles that shaped them. By erasing Fatima Sheikh, the radical solidarity between Dalits, Muslims, and women is invisibilised, and the convenient, dominant narrative of typical prototype reformers as saviours is reinforced.

B.R. Ambedkar, for instance, is sanitised into a token figure, hailed as the architect of the Constitution but stripped of his scathing critique of caste and his revolutionary vision for an egalitarian society. His advocacy for reservations, a lifeline for educational equity, is sidelined even as these policies are viciously attacked today. Ambedkar’s fiery critique of Hinduism’s role in upholding caste oppression is deliberately erased from school curricula and public discourse, making it easier to appropriate him while gutting his radical ideas.

Similarly, the contributions of Muslim freedom fighters like Ashfaqulla Khan and Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan are systematically downplayed to sustain communal stereotypes. Women like Jhalkaribai, the Dalit warrior who fought alongside Rani Lakshmibai, and Begum Rokeya, a Muslim reformer who championed women’s education, are excluded to uphold patriarchal and casteist narratives. Even Adivasi leaders like Birsa Munda, who fought against colonial exploitation and for Adivasi rights, are reduced to hollow symbols, their histories carefully erased to sustain their marginalisation.

But the silence is uneasy most of all when it comes to disabled individuals. Their absence from historical narratives is not just glaring but insidious. It reflects the deeply entrenched ableism in Indian society, which sees disability not as a social issue but as a private affliction to be ignored. This erasure denies disabled people even the most token representation, ensuring they remain outside the frameworks of education, policy, and society itself.

The Violent Silence of Ableism

The absence of discourse on disability in historical narratives is perhaps the most violent form of erasure. It is not just a denial of disabled lives but a refusal to even acknowledge their struggles and contributions. Ableist attitudes perpetuate the idea that disabled people are incapable of agency or participation in society, reinforcing their marginalisation.

Statements like “the deaf and blind do not go to school with others” go unchallenged, as though their exclusion is natural. This systematic exclusion reinforces invisibility of disabled, creating a narrative of othering and leaving a place only at the bottom of the social hierarchy, with no place in history and no claim to justice.

Ableism is a tool of domination, one that intersects with caste, gender, and religion to maintain systems of oppression. By refusing to document the lives and struggles of disabled people, society ensures an easy othering where disabled are invisible, unaccounted for, and unrepresented. This silence is not benign, it is violent.

Education: A Weapon of Exclusion

The erasure of marginalised voices from history is deeply tied to the politics of education. Education is not merely a tool for liberation; it has also been weaponised to exclude. By controlling whose stories are taught, dominant groups perpetuate the myth that Dalits, Muslims, Adivasis, women, and disabled people are undeserving of knowledge, power, or leadership.

This exclusion is evident in the privatisation of education, which transforms a fundamental right into an elitist privilege. Marginalised communities, already struggling under systemic oppression, are locked out of educational spaces, ensuring a continued cycle of poverty and exclusion. Reservation policies, which aim to provide equitable access, are constantly undermined. Their necessity is questioned as the struggles that birthed them are erased from public memory.

For disabled people, the exclusion is even starker. Accessible education systems and infrastructure are virtually non-existent, leaving them reliant on charity rather than rights-based systems. The very idea of education for the disabled is treated as an afterthought, ensuring they remain on the margins, locked out of opportunities for participation in society.

Reclaiming Radical Histories

To resist the politics of erasure, we must reclaim the radical histories of marginalised communities. Fatima Sheikh’s story must be restored not simply as a tribute to her legacy but as a weapon against the narratives that erase the struggles of Dalits, Muslims, Adivasis, women, and disabled people. The histories of Ambedkar, Jhalkaribai, Ashfaqulla Khan, Birsa Munda, and countless others must be told in their entirety, with their radical critiques and intersectional struggles at the forefront.

The absence of disability discourse must also be addressed. Disabled people’s lives and struggles must be documented, acknowledged, and integrated into mainstream narratives. This requires dismantling ableist attitudes and creating systems that recognise disability as a social and political issue, and not a personal battle.

The Politics of Memory and Justice

The politics of historical erasure is not just about the past, it is about controlling the present and foreclosing the future. By denying Fatima Sheikh and others like her their rightful place in history, the ruling elite seeks to sustain a system of exclusion that privileges dominant castes, religions, and abilities.

Fatima Sheikh’s legacy reminds us that education is not a privilege for the few but a right for all. Her work challenges the casteist, communal, patriarchal, and ableist narratives that underpin Indian society, offering a vision of education as a tool for liberation and solidarity. To honour her is to fight against the forces that erase her.

The fight against historical erasure is, ultimately, a fight for justice. It is a fight to ensure that history reflects the struggles and contributions of all communities, and that education becomes a tool to dismantle hierarchies rather than perpetuate them. This fight demands that we challenge the dominant narratives, expose their silences, and reclaim the radical potential of memory to inspire resistance and solidarity. Let us carry forward this fight, with the legacy of all those erased from history as our guide; while it remains important to ask ‘who benefits from these erasures?’

Shirin Akhter is Associate Professor, Department of Economics, Zakir Husain Delhi College, University of Delhi. Sharamisthaa Atreja is Assistant Professor at the Department of Philosophy, University of Delhi. The views are personal.

Courtesy: Newsclick

The post Fatima Sheikh: Politics of Historical Erasure, Exclusion appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Among the attendees, Daya Shankar (name changed) stood out. He showed great interest in the subject and posed numerous questions, some of which were sharp and thought-provoking. He communicated fluently and was highly articulate and argumentative in his approach.

During the talk, I left the podium and walked toward him. He was sitting on a bench in the back row with three other students. Our one-on-one conversation continued for a considerable time. Eventually, the professor who had organised the lecture had to intervene, saying, “Sir, Daya Shankar’s questions are endless.” Upon hearing this, many in the audience laughed. Although the formal session had ended, we continued our conversation outside the hall. Before leaving, we exchanged phone numbers, and since then, Daya Shankar and I have remained in touch.

Daya Shankar, an undergraduate student of English, belongs to the Marandi Adivasi group in Jharkhand, which is part of the larger Santhal community. The Santhals are considered one of the largest Adivasi groups in Jharkhand and West Bengal by population. “They have a legacy of anti-colonial struggles against the Zamindari system in the mid-19^th century”.

In addition to Jharkhand and West Bengal, the Santhals also reside in Bihar, Odisha, Assam, Tripura, Nepal, and Bangladesh. The Santhals predominantly speak Santali, a language belonging to the Austroasiatic family.

According to the 2011 Census, Adivasis, officially classified as Scheduled Tribes (ST), make up 26.3% of the population in Jharkhand, compared to 8.3% at the national level. Around 8.6 million Adivasis live in Jharkhand, comprising 32 different ST groups. Jharkhand has the 12th largest tribal population in India, with significant concentrations in districts like Simdega, West Singhbhum, Khunti, and Dumka. The Santhal Pargana division, which borders West Bengal, has a higher Muslim population at 22%, compared to the state’s overall Muslim population of just over 14%.

A few days ago, I wrote an article on the targeting of innocent Muslims in BJP-governed states, where their homes and shops are being demolished by bulldozers as a form of state punishment. I referred to these illegal acts as “bulldozer terrorism” because no provision in the Constitution or any law permits the demolition of a person’s home, whether they are accused or convicted, as a collective punishment. Human rights organisations have already documented the gross violations occurring in BJP-ruled states, where large numbers of Muslims have been forcibly rendered homeless. Recently, the Supreme Court has also spoken out against these bulldozer actions, placing a stay on them.

In hearing several petitions related to these demolitions, the apex court emphasized that India, as a secular country, cannot allow discrimination based on religion. The court also mentioned that it would soon issue nationwide guidelines to prevent such actions.

In this context, I wrote my article and shared it with my friends. Daya Shankar was one of the first to respond, offering criticism of both my work and my approach. Showing little concern for the bulldozer demolitions, Daya Shankar’s broader argument was that Muslims are the aggressors and that they refer to Hindus, including myself, as “kafirs.”

He went on to claim that my writings are often “pro-Muslim,” while, in his view, Muslims are exploiting Adivasi lands in Jharkhand and forcibly converting them to Islam. He also accused me of being “less concerned” about Adivasi issues and of prioritizing Muslims as the only minority group. Daya Shankar, an Adivasi student, further remarked that Islam fosters terrorism. In response to his comments and questions, I promised him I would address his points in writing.

I believe Daya Shankar’s opinion is largely shaped by the dominant Islamophobic discourse in the state. In the upcoming Jharkhand Assembly Elections, the BJP is playing the communal card, attempting to fracture Adivasi and Muslim unity to secure votes. Communal forces, with the support of the media, are constructing a narrative that Bangladeshi and Rohingya Muslim infiltrators are encroaching on Adivasi lands in the Santhal region and converting Adivasis to Islam through coercive methods, including the so-called ‘Love Jihad.’

Even Prime Minister Narendra Modi has raised this issue at electoral rallies in Jharkhand, raising the specter of Muslim infiltrators taking over Santhal tribal lands. At a recent rally in Jamshedpur, the Prime Minister made baseless and highly communal remarks aimed at polarizing voters along religious lines: “Infiltrators entering the state is a big issue… The state high court recently instituted an inquiry by an independent panel into such incidents. But the JMM government here is not ready to accept that illegal immigration is taking place in Jharkhand. In Santhal Pargana and Kolhan, infiltration by Bangladeshis and Rohingyas is a big threat. The identity and demography of this region is changing very fast” (The Economic Times, September 15).

What follows is my commentary on Daya Shankar’s criticisms of my work. I am choosing to share my reply publicly because of the growing anti-Muslim sentiment in the Adivasi regions of Jharkhand. For a long time, the Hindu Right has been working to create divisions between Adivasi and minority communities, such as Christians and Muslims. I fear that the poison of anti-Muslim hatred, which has already pervaded caste-based North India, is now spreading to the Adivasi regions. A symptom of this is the way Daya Shankar has developed a prejudice against Muslims. His questions do reflect this prejudice.

Daya Shankar: It seems like you have a strong affinity for Muslims, sir. I’ve noticed many of your posts tend to support or express sympathy toward them. Why is that?

Abhay: What’s wrong with having a strong affinity for Muslims? Would you deny the fact that India is a home to people of multiple religions and faiths? A large number of people who don’t follow any institutionalized religion are no less Indian. Take the Adivasi community, to which you belong, as an example. I have seen with my own eyes that rigidity about religious practices is least found among the Adivasi community. Unlike members of institutionalised religions, they hardly fight over religious structures. Similarly, there is no history of bloodshed over the correct interpretation of a holy text.

There are also groups of atheists who deny the existence of God and don’t accept that God is outside history. They, too, are equal citizens of India, and our Constitution grants them formal equality. But a negative trend is emerging in India with the rise of the Hindu Right, where a particular religious community is seen as the true Indians and loyal sons of the soil, while the rest—particularly Muslims and Christians—are viewed as belonging to non-Indic religions and therefore deemed untrustworthy.

The process of “othering” Muslims has a history of more than one hundred years in India. During colonial times, Hindu revivalist movements redefined the nation in terms of Brahmanical culture. When these revivalists realized that modern politics is based on numbers—put simply, that the majority community would rule over the minority—they sought to popularize Brahmanism by rebranding it as Hinduism. However, the upper-caste Hindu revivalists were only interested in tokenism, seeking to gain the support of the lower castes to defeat Muslim leadership and label them as “communal.”

It is true that our nationalist movement had many currents, including a strong secular one. However, Hindu nationalists managed to penetrate secular organizations and, under the guise of nationalism, promoted the interests of the upper-caste minority. In my view, the Partition of the country wasn’t engineered by any one leader. History often tends to cast one person as the hero and another as the villain, but we should avoid such simplifications.

Discrimination against Indian Muslims at the hands of the state is systemic. Governments have come and gone, but Muslims remain backward. Their representation in Parliament, legislative assemblies, and both public and private sector jobs is much lower than their share of the population, yet they are overrepresented in jails. They also suffer from communal riots, and their history and culture are not adequately represented in school textbooks. Even their homes are being demolished using bulldozers as punitive measures in BJP-ruled states.

Tell me, should we not demand justice for Muslims? Are they not equal citizens of India? Can our country progress if Muslims are kept backward? In a democratic and secular setup, no one should be discriminated against based on religion. If I have shown affinity for Muslims, and if my writings and activism have helped even a single Muslim, I would consider my life successful.

Daya Shankar: When a Muslim’s house is bulldozed, you express sympathy for them and their community. But don’t you also see how some Muslim extremists are mistreating and killing Hindus?

Abhay: Democracy is built on the rule of law. It cannot survive without secularism and respect for minority rights. Nowhere in a democracy is it justified to demolish the house of an accused or even a convicted person as a form of punishment. If I commit a crime, how could my family be made homeless? The law states that punishment must be proportional to the crime. For example, if I commit theft, I cannot be punished for murder. Numerous incidents have been recorded where houses and workplaces of Muslims have been bulldozed by BJP-ruled states as a punitive measure.

Human rights activists have documented that many victims of these bulldozer actions were those who had protested against government policies. The Constitution and the Supreme Court clearly state that peaceful protests cannot be suppressed. Dissent is a sign of a vibrant democracy. Yet, Muslims have been jailed, and their homes razed to the ground, simply for dissenting. How can anyone justify such bulldozer actions?

Well-known human rights organisations like Amnesty International have shown in recent reports that these actions violate both national legal procedures and international human rights standards. In most cases, victims were not given enough time to pursue legal remedies; their houses were demolished quickly, their family members beaten, and their lives ruined. The Supreme Court has intervened, placing a stay on these actions, and has promised to introduce nationwide guidelines to ensure no community is unfairly targeted.

Have I done anything wrong by speaking against bulldozer actions? You, as an Adivasi, can likely relate to this issue because Adivasis have been the most displaced people in the name of development since Independence. Whether it’s for dam construction, mining, or industrialisation, who is being displaced? We know the answer: it’s the Adivasis. Have you ever seen the houses of the rich being demolished? No, because they are powerful. Muslims’ homes are being demolished because they have been rendered powerless. These actions are designed to send a message to the minority community: if you raise your voice, you will be punished.

Let me make my point clear: a country cannot progress if any section of its society is mistreated or discriminated against. As a journalist, when I write about the issues facing marginalised communities, including Muslims, I am not doing charity. It’s the job of a journalist to highlight the struggles of the downtrodden.

As for your claim that Muslims consider you or me a “kafir,” that’s simply not true. Let me share my experience. I spent four years living in Sabzi Bagh, Patna, a predominantly Muslim area, during my graduation days. I never heard a Muslim call me a “kafir.” I’m not saying there aren’t a few Muslims who may believe this, but should we take them as representatives of the entire Muslim community? Likewise, many Hindus hold prejudices against Muslims, but should they be considered the spokespersons for all Hindus? I’m sure your answer is no.

I’ve even read the Quran, and it clearly teaches its followers not to disrespect people of other faiths, lest they, in turn, speak ill of Islam. The Quran emphasizes both worship of God and service to humanity, including non-Muslims, on numerous occasions. Islamic history shows that the Prophet Muhammad formed alliances with non-Muslims and advocated for fair treatment of all. Even during Muslim rule, with a few exceptions, minorities were protected.

I disagree with your unsubstantiated claim that Hindus are being killed by Muslims on a large scale. Show me any reliable source that proves Hindus are being persecuted. Yes, there are cases where a Muslim may kill a Hindu, or vice versa, but these are rare incidents. And in such cases, the law acts against the murderer. Your claim that Hindus are being killed by Muslims on a large scale simply isn’t true.

Daya Shankar: There is terrorism associated with Islam, and there are terrorists within the faith. I believe there is something fundamentally wrong here. Otherwise, why are so many terrorists emerging from just one religion?

Abhay: Terrorism is not connected to any particular religion. Terrorists can belong to any faith, or they may be atheists. There is no study proving that all terrorists are Muslims. Likewise, there is no reliable data showing that Muslim-run terrorist organizations are more numerous globally than those run by non-Muslims. In fact, Muslims are among the worst victims of terrorism.

If you examine the concept of terrorism, its definition is still not universally accepted. Historically, the image of a terrorist is dynamic. Someone seen as a terrorist today could be regarded as a freedom fighter tomorrow, and vice versa. Similarly, a freedom fighter in one country might be seen as a terrorist in another. Many scholars agree that the portrayal of Muslims as terrorists gained traction after the Cold War.

To truly understand terrorism, you need to explore its historical, political, and economic dimensions on both national and global levels. Viewing terrorism solely through a religious or cultural lens will not deepen your understanding. You also need to examine the link between terrorism and the arms industry. Ask yourself: Who benefits most from perpetuating a regime of insecurity?

Even in Adivasi areas, those fighting to protect their land and resources are often arrested by the state and charged under anti-terror laws. Do you consider them terrorists just because they are fighting for their rights?

I also disagree with your view that Islam is inherently violent. I have read the Quran many times, and nowhere does it instruct its followers to kill others. The core of the Quranic teachings revolves around the worship of God and the service to humanity.

Look at the life of the Prophet Muhammad. He always sought to build peace and avoid war. He only engaged in warfare when forced to, and even then, only in self-defense. Beyond self-defense, the Quran does not endorse violence. If you doubt my words, I encourage you to read the Quran yourself. I would be happy to provide you with a copy.

Daya Shankar: Are Muslims the only minority? What about Adivasis? Aren’t they minorities too? What have you done for the welfare of Adivasis and tribal communities?

Abhay: I have never claimed that Muslims are the only minority. Legally, minorities are often defined in terms of religion, and religion is certainly an important criterion. However, my understanding of minorities is influenced by the works of Babasaheb B.R. Ambedkar. In his small book States and Minorities, written around the time of Independence, Ambedkar offered a broader definition of minority. He argued that to consider a community a minority, one must assess its “social, economic, and educational condition.”

By Ambedkar’s definition, I firmly believe that Adivasis are a minority. Government data consistently shows that Adivasis are lagging behind on almost every development index. Worse still, misguided development policies have severely impacted their lives, livelihoods, and cultures. Their resources are being seized by the corporate-state alliance. Over the past 80 years, the demographic makeup of Adivasi regions has changed, with outsiders increasingly taking control of their resources.

However, there is no evidence to suggest that these outsiders are exclusively Muslims, nor is there any proof that Muslim outsiders have displaced Adivasis. Contrary to the claims of the Hindu Right, the history of Jharkhand shows that Adivasis and Muslims have shared a strong bond and lived in peace for a long time. In fact, most Muslims in Jharkhand are Pasmanda Muslims, who belong to the backward castes. The Ansari community, a large group within the Pasmanda Muslims, has traditionally been weavers, making fabrics for Adivasi regions.

Sociologically, Pasmanda and Dalit Muslims share many cultural practices with Adivasis, and there is no history of significant conflict between them. The rise of Hindu nationalist forces has injected the narrative of Islamophobia into this peaceful coexistence. The Hindu Right is eager to hold on to power in Adivasi regions to facilitate corporate exploitation of their resources. They understand that unity between Adivasis and Muslims is a major barrier to their political ambitions.

That’s why there’s a deliberate effort to create misunderstandings between Adivasis and Muslims. Weakening this unity not only undermines the prospects of secular parties but also opens the door for the Hindu Right to seize power. As defenders of the dominant interests in society, they often scapegoat Muslims, portraying them as a threat to the well-being of non-Muslims.

Daya Shankar: Adivasi lands are being grabbed by Muslim settlers, leading to the displacement and marginalization of the Adivasi people. What’s your take on this?

Abhay: As I mentioned earlier, the dominant forces in society often deflect attention from the real sources of exploitation by presenting Muslims as a threat. You’ve likely noticed that BJP leaders are focusing on supposed Bangladeshi and Rohingya infiltration in Jharkhand as the central issue in the assembly elections. Let’s assume for a moment that there is indeed infiltration from Bangladesh and Myanmar into Jharkhand. Should we blame the state government, led by an Adivasi chief minister, or the BJP-led Prime Minister Modi?

If foreign infiltrators are entering Jharkhand, what are our security agencies doing at the borders? Border security falls under the responsibility of the Union Government, which is led by Prime Minister Modi. Shouldn’t the focus be on what the Central Government is doing about this, rather than turning it into an election issue? There is no official data or statement to confirm this alleged infiltration in Adivasi areas.

I’m not denying that there could be isolated conflicts between some Adivasis and Muslims at the local level, but these are not part of a grand political design, nor do they pose a threat to national security. The narrative of Muslim infiltrators grabbing Adivasi land, abducting women, and forcing conversions is often amplified during election seasons to undermine the Adivasi chief minister and sway voters.

Daya Shankar: There have also been reports of Adivasis being coerced into converting to Islam. Will you ignore these issues?

Abhay: There is no credible evidence to suggest that Muslims are coercing Adivasis into converting to Islam. We live in a democracy—do you truly believe that, in such a system, a minority community could forcefully convert members of the majority? Have you met anyone personally who has complained of being forced to convert by Muslims?

If Muslims didn’t force Adivasis to convert during their rule before colonialism, do you think they are in a position to do so in post-independent India, when they are one of the most marginalized and discriminated-against communities? The media often spreads rumors about forced conversions by Muslims but remains silent on the long-standing efforts of the RSS to assimilate Adivasis into Hinduism.

If Adivasis were allowed to declare their religion in the Census, why is there no provision for this in a secular country? Have you ever considered that? Many Adivasis do not wish to be assimilated into Hinduism and are demanding official recognition of their Sarna religion in the Census. Yet, their demands have not been accepted. Isn’t this a more pressing issue?

Daya Shankar: Adivasi communities have faced violence, threats, and intimidation from certain Muslim groups. Will you deny these facts?

Abhay: As I mentioned earlier, there may indeed be local-level conflicts between Adivasis and Muslims. These situations can arise, for example, if an Adivasi is a landless laborer and a Muslim is a landowner—class conflict would naturally occur. Similarly, if a Muslim mason is constructing a house for an Adivasi, disputes over wages could happen. These types of conflicts stem from economic and class struggles, not religious differences.

I am not denying the existence of these occasional conflicts, but they are not indicative of a larger systemic problem between Adivasis and Muslims. What is often overlooked is the shared cultural and social realities between these two communities. Both Adivasis and Muslims are largely marginalized and underprivileged in states like Jharkhand, and both are victims of exploitation by the upper-caste elites.

There is no credible evidence or data suggesting that Muslims are the primary source of threats or violence against Adivasis. The bigger reality is that both Adivasis and Muslims face state discrimination and are victims of corporate exploitation. The focus should be on addressing these shared struggles rather than pitting one marginalized group against another.

Some Clarifications

Before I conclude, let me clarify that my response to Daya Shankar’s question is not exhaustive. Instead of delving into details, I have attempted to outline the broader issue. Some critics may argue that by addressing Daya Shankar’s case, I am unintentionally reinforcing the BJP’s narrative that Adivasis feel threatened by Muslims. To such critics, I would like to emphasize that I do not consider Daya Shankar to be representative of the entire Adivasi voice in Jharkhand. As I mentioned earlier, the Adivasi community is made up of several tribes, each with its own diversity. The BJP, too, is pushing the narrative of Bangladeshi and Rohingya infiltration more in the Santhal regions than in other parts of Jharkhand.

My aim in responding to Daya Shankar’s misunderstanding about Muslims and Islam is to highlight the larger communal discourse propagated by the Hindu Right and its media allies. In recent years, the influence of the Hindu Right has grown significantly in Jharkhand, and manufactured communal conflicts have become more frequent. My argument is that these anti-Muslim narratives are spreading quickly in Adivasi regions, and young people like Daya Shankar are falling prey to them. Therefore, the need of the hour is not to deny these negative trends but to actively work to counter them. We must highlight the shared cultural bonds between Adivasis and Muslims to challenge Hindutva propaganda.

I also want to clarify that this article is not intended to “educate” the Adivasi community about secularism and composite culture. I am fully aware of the limitations of my own identity as a Brahmin male raised in a caste-based society. My response should not be seen as didactic, but rather as a reflection of a particular moment. Nowhere am I claiming to teach Adivasis any lessons on secularism. On the contrary, I believe that Adivasi cosmology offers hope and wisdom for a society that is losing its way.

(Dr. Abhay Kumar is an independent journalist. His broad interests include minority rights and social justice. Email: debatingissues@gmail.com)

Related:

Redefining Indian Tradition Minus Christianity & Islam is Intellectual Dishonesty

Christians face escalating attacks as far-right Hindu groups intensify persecution

Temple Management & Tirupati: the ‘WHYs’ behind temple regulation explained

The post On the Muslim question: A dialogue with an Adivasi Youth appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In recent years, India’s democracy and Constitution have faced an unprecedented crisis. Democratic institutions have collapsed, and the independence of the judiciary and oversight bodies has been severely compromised. The functioning of Parliament has been gravely impaired. The government has institutionalized corruption and lack of transparency in election funding through the Electoral Bonds system, allowing corporations to secretly divert black money to the ruling party’s coffers. The dilution of the Right to Information Act has undermined citizens’ fundamental democratic right to question the government and hold it accountable.

Neo-liberal economic policies and growing crony capitalism have adversely impacted women in general, but especially those who belong to the Dalit, Adivasi and other marginalized communities. Their fragile economic base has been devastated.

Attacks on minorities have created an atmosphere of fear and insecurity, with Muslims and Christians facing targeted discrimination. The country has witnessed a systematic attempt to spread communal hatred and divide people along religious lines. This communal agenda is being implemented with vengeance, resulting in large-scale violence, such as in Manipur, and daily attacks on individuals, groups, and residential colonies of minorities. Lynching, killing, and demolishing houses, localities, mosques, and churches have become commonplace. Members of minority communities are being implicated in false cases, tortured, arrested, and languishing in jails without trial.

The criminal justice system in India has virtually collapsed, particularly with regards to minority rights, especially for Muslims and Christians. There has been a steady deterioration in the rule of law with alarming cases of police excesses, including custodial deaths.

To address this crisis, Anhad, in collaboration with United Christian Forum, organized a convention titled “The Quest for Equality and Justice: Status of Muslims & Christians in Contemporary India” on September 14, 2024, from 3-7 pm at Jawahar Bhawan, New Delhi. The convention aimed to take stock of the situation and plan future strategies to safeguard secular values.

The post Status of Muslims & Christians in Contemporary India- Teesta Setalvad appeared first on SabrangIndia.