Islamic seminaries continue to be targeted in Shravasti and Maharajganj districts, enraging the Muslim community
SHRAVASTI – The Uttar Pradesh government has intensified its campaign against alleged illegal madrasas, particularly those claimed to be built on government land. In a fresh wave of action, Bulldozers raze madrasas in Shravasti and Maharajganj districts in a repeat of similar recent operations in the border districts of the state.
According to officials, this action is part of a wider drive to reclaim public land and enforce land laws. However, the selective targeting of madrasas has sparked concerns.
A madrasa operating for nearly 57 years in Semrahni village, Farenda tehsil, Maharajganj district, was demolished on Wednesday. The institution, which was built on plot number 278 — recorded as a “manure pit” in official records — was allegedly constructed without legal authorisation.
The local administration, following a court order under the Forest Act Section 67, carried out the demolition. A sizeable contingent of police and revenue officers was present to maintain order during the operation. Officials claimed the madrasa, due to its location on government land, violated land use norms.
Similarly, in Shravasti’s Bhinga tehsil, a madrasa named Darul Quran was demolished in Karim Purva village of Rampur Jabdi. Officials stated that the institution was built without permission on public land.
“A prior notice was served to the madrasa management,” said a district official. “We are following due process. Any construction on government land without valid documents will face action.”
Multiple alleged illegal madrasas have previously been brought down in the Shravasti district under the same policy.
These incidents are part of a broader crackdown across seven districts — Shravasti, Bahraich, Balrampur, Siddharthnagar, Maharajganj, Pilibhit, and Lakhimpur Kheri — all located along the Indo-Nepal border. In total, authorities have acted against more than 350 religious structures, including mosques, madrasas, dargahs, and Idgahs.
In Bahraich alone, bulldozers demolished over 170 madrasas. Officials claim these structures were identified as “encroachments” on public or forest lands.
According to the state administration, the demolitions are being carried out under due legal procedures. Notices are served, and cases are presented in local courts before action is taken. Land Revenue and Forest Acts are cited to justify removals from public land, which is often reserved for community use or forest preservation.
“No religious or private institution has the right to encroach upon government land,” a senior officer in Maharajganj said. “Our responsibility is to uphold the rule of law.”
Despite the government’s legal justification, critics have raised concerns about the selectivity of the operation. Many local Muslim leaders and civil rights activists argue that the focus on madrasas suggests communal bias.
“It is not illegal to run a madrasa,” said Mohammad Usman, a resident of Bahraich. “But if the government wants to regularise them, there should be a proper process, not bulldozers.”
A local cleric, requesting anonymity, stated: “We understand the need to comply with the law, but this kind of demolition drive, especially targeting only Muslim institutions, sends the wrong message. It creates fear and resentment.”
Others have pointed out that while action is taken swiftly against Muslim-run institutions, illegal constructions by members of other communities are often overlooked.
The silence from minority welfare departments and the lack of outreach to the affected communities have added to the discontent. Many madrasa operators claim they have never been offered the opportunity to regularise their institutions or relocate them, despite serving students for decades.
An elderly teacher from Shravasti, whose madrasa was recently demolished, said: “We served the poor and orphaned children here for years. Now the building is gone. What about the future of these children?”
The demolition drives have left behind scenes of destruction and despair. In many villages, students and teachers are now without shelter or infrastructure.
“I was doing Hifz (memorisation of the Qur’an) here,” said 13-year-old Salman from Farenda. “When I came in the morning, everything was broken. Where will we go now?”
Parents and residents have voiced concern over the lack of rehabilitation or educational alternatives for children studying in these madrasas. With the new academic year approaching, many families are unsure about where to send their children.
The timing and focus of the demolition drive have led some observers to suggest that the action could be politically motivated. With elections on the horizon and communal polarisation often playing a role in campaign narratives, some suspect that targeting madrasas may be part of a broader strategy.
“The ruling party often uses bulldozer justice to showcase strength,” said a political analyst based in Lucknow. “But when actions seem to disproportionately affect one community, questions of intent inevitably arise.”
The state administration has indicated that it will continue to act against any illegal construction, regardless of religious affiliation. However, it remains unclear whether similar demolitions have been or will be carried out against non-Muslim religious or educational structures built without authorisation.
Meanwhile, human rights groups and legal experts have called for judicial review and urged the government to adopt a more transparent, consultative approach.
“If these structures are illegal, fair legal processes must be followed, including rehabilitation or regularisation,” said advocate Shariq Ahmed. “India is a rule-of-law democracy, not a bulldozer state.”
As bulldozers roll through more villages in Uttar Pradesh, the affected communities, especially those linked to Islamic educational institutions, are left grappling with uncertainty and fear. While the government asserts that these demolitions are part of a law-and-order mission, the selective nature of the action continues to stir controversy and debate over the balance between legality and communal harmony.
