The campaign by Hindutva supporters has deeply impacted the Muslim community in the town, with many families still displaced and their businesses ruined.
Team Clarion
PUROLA – In June last year, Purola, a small town in Uttarakhand, was in turmoil. A campaign by Hindu right-wing groups demanding Muslims must vacate the town made national headlines. At least 41 families, fearing reprisal from Hindutva supporters, left the town with six of them permanently relocating to the state’s other parts.
The campaign was sparked by allegations that two men, one of them Muslim, had tried to abduct a 14-year-old girl under the “ruse of marriage” to convert her to Islam. This incident ignited anti-Muslim frenzy across the Uttarkashi district, where Purola is located, as Hindutva outfits accused the two men – 22-year-old Uvaid Khan and his 24-year-old friend Jitendra Saini – of “love jihad.”
“Love Jihad” is a conspiracy theory that accuses Muslim men of tricking Hindu women into romantic relationships to convert them to Islam. Khan and Saini were booked for kidnapping and procuring a minor under sections of the Indian Penal Code and for sexual assault under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO).
Leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which governs the state, fueled communal tensions with insinuations about “outsiders from a certain community” swamping the hills.
However, a year later, the case against Khan and Saini collapsed. On May 10, a court in Uttarkashi acquitted both men, finding the allegations false.
Court Findings
The court’s judgement raised questions over the role of the police in whipping up hysteria against Muslims. During the trial, the 14-year-old girl told the court that the police had tutored her to accuse Khan and Saini of trying to abduct her.
The court also found inconsistencies in the statement of the sole eyewitness in the case – Aashish Chunar, a member of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the ideological parent of the BJP.
Judge Gurubaksh Singh, who presided over the case, noted: “The prosecution failed to provide any statement or evidence to prove that Khan and Saini had touched the minor with sexual intent.”
A Community in Fear
Nearly 99% of Purola’s 35,000 residents are Hindus. Over the years, a few dozen Muslim families had moved to the hill town from western Uttar Pradesh to run businesses. Among them was the family of Uvaid Khan, who had arrived in Purola from Uttar Pradesh’s Bijnor in 2011. They owned shops dealing in furniture, mattresses, and ice cream. Across the road was the shop of Jitendra Saini, a mechanic who moved to Purola in 2021.
Khan and Saini were friends, often seen traveling together and sharing gym photos on social media.
On May 31, the Times of India reported an “alleged ‘love jihad’ case” involving Khan and Saini, stating they were “caught while allegedly trying to elope with a Hindu girl” on May 26. The minor was an orphan, looked after by her uncle and aunt.
The Trial
The trial against Khan and Saini spanned 19 hearings from August 2023 to May 2024. The main eyewitness, Aashish Chunar, called the minor’s uncle on May 26, claiming that two men were trying to get his niece to climb into a tempo. Chunar then brought the girl to his shop.
However, during the trial, the minor’s uncle and aunt testified that the girl had not mentioned any abduction attempt and that the complaint was written on Chunar’s instruction.
In the court, Chunar stated, “I saw her talking to two men from a distance. But I don’t know if they were Saini or that other Muslim boy.”
The minor’s statement in court contradicted her initial statement made before a civil judge. She told the court that the police had tutored her to implicate Khan and Saini. “Before I gave the statement, the police had explained to me what all I had to say,” she said.
The Aftermath
The acquittal of Khan and Saini has brought relief but also highlighted the community’s ordeal. Zahid Malik, a Muslim shop owner in Purola, had to permanently leave the town with his family after the protests. “I never went back to Purola after that incident. We had a good business there. But all that is gone now,” Malik said.
Advocate Halim Baig, who represented Khan and Saini, commented, “To me, it seemed like a planned conspiracy. Khan’s family ran a very successful business in the town. Many people did not like that.”
Questions Over Police Conduct
The police officials involved denied tutoring the girl. KC Chauhan, the then station house officer of Purola police station, refuted the girl’s allegations, saying, “What would the police get out of doing that? The girl must be lying. She was not mentally sound anyway.”
Despite the court’s decision, the impact on the Muslim community in Purola remains profound, with many families still displaced and businesses ruined. The case has brought to light the dangers of communal politics and the importance of judicial scrutiny in such matters.