The district court stresses that the judiciary cannot remain silent in the face of hate-driven crimes against Muslims
NEW DELHI/NUH – In a strong message against rising hate crimes, a district court in Haryana’s Nuh has refused bail to a group of extremists accused of attacking and kidnapping the in-charge of a madrasa. The court described the act as one fuelled by a ‘hateful mentality’ and said it could not remain a mute spectator while such violence was being planned and carried out.
The incident took place several weeks ago when Mehboob, who runs a madrasa in Nuh, was assaulted by armed men simply because the main entrance to the school was locked during teaching hours. According to the First Information Report (FIR), the assailants ambushed him twice. After their initial assault, they returned with weapons and vehicles, launching a second, carefully planned attack before kidnapping him.
The police arrested the accused, who later filed a bail petition in the district court. However, the court dismissed their plea.
While rejecting the bail application, the district judge stated: “The court has a very big responsibility. It cannot sit as a mute spectator when crimes motivated by hate are brought before it. There is no justification for granting bail in this case.”
Chaudhry Talha, lawyer for the victim, welcomed the court’s decision, describing it as a small victory for justice in the face of growing attacks on Muslims.
“The attackers not only assaulted Mehboob but also kidnapped him,” Talha told reporters. “This was not a sudden fight but a well-planned conspiracy. The FIR shows that weapons were used, vehicles were brought, and the accused carried out their plan with clear intent to harm.”
Talha also highlighted the criminal history of one of the petitioners. “One of the main accused, Sameri, already has seven cases registered against him. His record reflects his violent past. Such people should not be allowed to walk free,” he said.
Local residents say this case is yet another example of how Muslims and their institutions are increasingly being singled out for violence. Many see the court’s decision as a much-needed reminder that the law still protects the weak.
“If the court had granted bail, it would have encouraged more attacks on our madrasas,” said a resident of Nuh, who did not wish to be named. “We want justice and protection. Muslims in this country should not live in fear.”
The madrasa in-charge Mehboob had repeatedly explained to the attackers that the main gate of his institution is always closed during classes, as part of regular practice. Yet, the extremists chose to turn this into a provocation, targeting him for his role and identity.
The FIR notes that the attackers’ actions were deliberate, driven not by misunderstanding but by hate. Community leaders say this reflects a broader trend of hostility towards Muslims across parts of Haryana and beyond.
Human rights activists have urged the authorities to treat the attack as part of a larger pattern of communal targeting.
“When an armed group feels emboldened to attack a madrasa head and kidnap him, it is more than a crime – it is an attack on India’s promise of safety and equality for all citizens,” said one activist.
For now, the rejection of bail has been welcomed by the Muslim community in Nuh. But they also say it is only the first step. The demand is for a fair trial, strong punishment for those guilty, and measures to stop such crimes from happening again.
“Justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done,” Talha reminded. “If the law does not stand with innocent Muslims today, then tomorrow no one will be safe.”
