Rights groups, opposition allege biased crackdown and accuse the administration of shielding Hindu mobs
BAHRAICH — The imposition of the National Security Act (NSA) on eight Muslims youths in the Mahsi–Maharajganj area of Bahraich in Uttar Pradesh has ignited a political and social storm, as rights activists and opposition parties accuse the administration of shielding Hindu mobs while targeting one community.
The communal clash took place on 13 October 2024, during a Durga idol immersion procession in Rehuwa Mansoor village, when provocative songs were played on loudspeakers. According to locals, the music targeted Muslims and became a flashpoint when the procession neared a mosque.
Eyewitnesses allege that despite repeated pleas to stop the inflammatory songs, members of Hindutva outfits provoked the situation further. Stones were thrown, homes in Muslim areas were set on fire, and even religious symbols were desecrated. A man named Ram Gopal Mishra was killed during the chaos, after which violence escalated further.
Yet, almost a year later, the District Magistrate of Bahraich has approved NSA charges under Section 3(2) of the 1980 Act against eight Muslim youths alone—including Maroof Ali, Nanaku, Mohammed Faheem, Mohammed Afzal alias Kallu, Mohammed Zeeshan alias Raja, Javed, Shoaib Khan and Saif Ali.
District Magistrate declared: “This action has been taken to maintain law and order, communal harmony and public safety. If anyone tries to disrupt peace in the future, strict measures will be taken.”
But this justification has failed to silence critics. Rights groups have strongly condemned what they call “one-sided action.”
Local social activist Rashid Khan told reporters: “When Hindu mobs torched Muslim houses and attacked mosques, no one was booked under NSA. Why are only Muslim youths behind bars? This selective justice deepens mistrust in the system.”
Opposition leaders too voiced outrage. Samajwadi Party spokesperson Anita Verma said: “The Bahraich case shows how the administration is working under political pressure. Hindus who led the mob attacks are free, while Muslims are being punished collectively.”
Residents of Maharajganj allege that police reports deliberately ignored the role of Hindu groups. One elderly villager, refusing to be named, said: “We saw people with saffron flags entering Muslim homes, looting and setting them on fire. Today, only our children are in jail. Is this justice?”
The violence began when Ram Gopal Mishra allegedly climbed onto the roof of a Muslim family’s house and replaced a religious flag with a saffron one. Soon after, he was shot dead by unknown persons, sparking further aggression from Hindu mobs.
Reports at the time suggested that Muslim localities were specifically targeted, with several homes burnt and families displaced. Despite this, no Hindu accused has been charged under NSA.
The UP government, under pressure from right-wing groups, is now facing mounting criticism for what many call an “orchestrated attempt to criminalise Muslims.”
Lawyer and minority rights advocate Mohammed Shakeel argued: “NSA is meant for threats to national security, not for punishing a community after a riot. By applying it selectively, the state is violating constitutional guarantees of equality.”
Meanwhile, families of the accused say they are being made scapegoats. Shoaib Khan’s mother wept outside her house, saying: “My son was not even present. Police took him away without proof. They want to break us.”
The contrast in police response has become a central point of debate: while Muslims have been jailed under NSA, Hindus accused of arson, mob violence and desecration walk free.
Human rights groups have demanded an impartial inquiry, warning that such bias could further inflame communal tensions.
The Bahraich episode, many argue, exposes how law enforcement is increasingly being used as a political tool. As one activist bluntly put it: “When mobs burn Muslim houses, it is ignored. When Muslims protest, it becomes a crime against the nation.”
