Uma Bharti and Ketki Singh’s demand ignites controversy over cultural erasure of Muslims and historical bias
NEW DELHI – Uttar Pradesh has once again become the centre of a heated political debate as BJP leaders called for renaming districts with Muslim names. The controversy escalated after Uma Bharti, former chief minister of Madhya Pradesh, demanded that Shahjahanpur’s name be changed, describing it as a “symbol of slavery.”
Speaking at a statue unveiling of Avantibai Lodhi in Aonla, Bareilly, Uma Bharti said, “When I was coming here, I read the name Shahjahanpur on the way, I did not like it. This name smells of slavery and I want Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath to change it. I do not want to hear this name again.”
Following her remarks, BJP MLA from Ballia, Ketki Singh, intensified the campaign by targeting other districts with Muslim names, including Ghazipur, Azamgarh, and Mau. She stated, “When I come to Lucknow, I am given the identity of rebel Ballia, so shouldn’t I think that my real identity is from my village, my thinking, my ancestors and culture?”
Ketki Singh further criticised the historical legacy of Muslim rulers associated with these districts, saying, “n Ghazipur, there is talk of Hindu-Muslim unity in the name of Syed Ghazi Saheb, just like Akbar is called “great”. Changing the names of Ghazipur, Azamgarh and Mau will improve history, strengthen the future and our next generation will get a chance to know about their glorious ancestors.”
The remarks have sparked widespread outrage among locals, historians, and Muslim communities, who see this as an attempt to erase centuries of Indian Muslim history and culture. Many argue that Shahjahanpur was named after the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan and is part of India’s rich cultural heritage.
Historian Dr Salman Farooqi commented, “Renaming districts with Muslim names is not about development or identity—it is an attack on history and a deliberate attempt to alienate the Muslim community.”
Locals have also expressed disappointment. Abdul Rahman, a Shahjahanpur resident, said, “Our district has carried this name for generations. It represents our ancestors and our culture. We do not consider it a symbol of slavery. Such statements are hurtful and politically motivated.”
Political analysts note that this move comes at a time when issues like unemployment, inflation, and law and order are pressing concerns in Uttar Pradesh. Prof Meera Razi from Lucknow University remarked, “Renaming campaigns are a diversionary tactic. The BJP uses communal issues to shift public attention away from governance failures.”
Communal organisations have warned against attempts to rewrite history. The All India Muslim Scholars Council stated, “Muslim heritage in India is inseparable from the nation’s history. Shahjahanpur, Azamgarh, Mau, and Ghazipur are living testimonies of our shared past. Any attempt to erase them is unacceptable.”
This latest controversy has once again raised questions about the BJP’s approach to minority communities in Uttar Pradesh, highlighting tensions between political symbolism and historical reality. Residents fear that if these demands are implemented, it could deepen communal divides and threaten the pluralistic fabric of Indian society.
