Hindus face violence during Ram Navami; West Bengal CM deflects blame, gives clean chit to Muslim perpetrators
Medinipur, West Bengal, India 
2 April, 2023
Case Summary
In West Bengal, Muslims ran riots against Hindus celebrating Ram Navami this year. The CM of the state, Mamata Banerjee, blaming the Hindus for the violence, called upon the Muslim community to pray to Allah to finish off the 'rioters' in the state. Further giving a clean chit to Islamists and absolving them of any wrongdoing during the Hindu festival, Mamata Banerjee claimed that Hindus took out Ram Navami processions without permission, and asked why there should be processions for five days. ‘Don’t carry guns in procession, don’t carry bombs in the processions, she said, claiming that guns and bombs were carried by Hindu devotees. ‘Despite the availability of so many roads, they willingly entered minority areas, and there they burnt fruit carts, fruits which are consumed during Ramzan’, she further claimed. The West Bengal CM then warned the Hindus against planning any more violence on Hanuman Jayanti, implying that the Ram Navami violence was planned by Hindus. She also said that it was the responsibility of Hindus to ensure that no Muslim comes under attack from anyone on Hanuman Jayanti on 6th April.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This incident has been added to the tracker under the category- Hate speech against Hindus. Under this, the subcategory selected is- Anti-Hindu subversion and prejudice. The tertiary category selected is- Anti-Hindu fake news or downplaying. Hate speech is defined as any speech, gesture, conduct, writing, or display that is prejudicial against a specific individual and/or group of people, which is leading to or may lead to violence, prejudicial action or hate against that individual and/or group. Media plays a specific and overarching reach in perpetuating prejudicial attitudes towards a community owing to unfair, untrue coverage and/or misrepresentation/misinterpretation, selective coverage and/or omission of facts of/pertaining to issues affecting a specific religious group. This type of bias can dehumanise the victim group, making it easier for others to justify harmful actions against them, which aligns with the objectives of hate speech laws aimed at preventing such harm. It is often observed that the media takes a prejudicial stand against the Hindu community driven by their need to shield the aggressor community which happens to be a numeric minority, however, is the one perpetrating violence against Hindus. For example, the media is often quick to contextualise religiously motivated crimes against Hindus, omit or misrepresent facts that point towards religiously motivated hate crimes, justify and/or downplay religiously motivated hate crimes or simply present fake news to stereotype Hindus. Such media bias leads to the denial of persecution and is often used to dehumanise Hindus, leading to justification for violence against them. For example, the media covered several fake allegations of Hindus targeting Muslims and forcing them to chant Jai Shree Ram. Most of these cases were proved false and fabricated after police investigation. These fake news reports were subsequently never retracted or clarified. Such fake news led to the justification of violence and dehumanisation of Hindus based on the argument that since Hindus targeted Muslims and forced them to chant Jai Shree Ram, the dehumanisation of Hindus and violence against them was par for the course and merely a retaliation. Such media bias leads to prejudicial portrayal of Hindus and offers a justification for violence against them and therefore, is considered hate speech under this category. This case has been recorded as a hate crime under hate speech against Hindus as it involves public statements by a constitutional authority that shift blame onto Hindu devotees while downplaying violence directed at them during a major religious festival. The remarks were made in the context of Ram Navami, a significant Hindu festival marked by public processions and expressions of faith. Instead of acknowledging the targeting of Hindu devotees, the statements attributed responsibility for the violence to the Hindu community itself, thereby reframing victims as perpetrators and diluting the gravity of the attacks. Such framing carries serious implications. When violence against a community is minimised or rationalised while that same community is publicly blamed, it delegitimises their suffering and undermines their right to security and justice. Assertions that Hindu processions were provocative, coupled with claims that they triggered unrest, function to obscure the sequence of events and shift focus away from the violence faced by Hindus. This constitutes a clear instance of narrative distortion where the victims are portrayed as responsible for the harm inflicted upon them. This incident must also be viewed within a broader and consistent pattern observed in West Bengal over several years, where incidents involving targeted violence, vandalism, and intimidation against Hindus have frequently been downplayed, misrepresented, or denied by the state machinery. This pattern of whitewashing has become increasingly visible, with repeated instances where communal elements of violence are reframed as “local disputes” or “minor clashes,” thereby obscuring their religious dimension. A notable example of such systemic downplaying can be seen in incidents across regions such as Basirhat, Malda, Murshidabad, Midnapore, and Uttar Dinajpur. In Basirhat, when a Kali temple was vandalised and the idol desecrated, the incident was quickly dismissed as the act of a “mentally unstable” individual, without thorough investigation. Similarly, in cases of violence in Murshidabad and Malda involving arson, looting, and attacks on Hindu homes and temples, the events were described as routine disturbances rather than acknowledging their communal targeting. In several instances, official statements appeared to contradict eyewitness accounts and visual evidence, raising concerns about selective interpretation and institutional bias. The pattern extends beyond downplaying violence to the treatment of Hindu religious expression itself. There have been repeated instances where Hindu practices and symbols have been subjected to scrutiny or restriction. Expressions such as “Jai Shri Ram” have been publicly criticised, and in some cases, individuals have faced action for raising such slogans. Permissions for Hindu processions, particularly during festivals like Ram Navami and Hanuman Jayanti, have often been restricted on grounds of law and order, while similar constraints are not consistently observed for other religious gatherings. Decisions such as restricting Durga Puja immersions in view of Muharram processions have further contributed to perceptions of differential treatment. Within this broader context, the statements made in the present case reinforce a narrative in which Hindu religious expression is portrayed as a source of provocation, while violence against Hindus is minimised. By emphasising alleged actions of Hindu devotees and questioning the legitimacy of their religious processions, the discourse shifts attention away from those who were targeted and places the burden of responsibility on the victims themselves. This form of narrative construction is significant because it shapes public perception and institutional response. When authorities frame incidents in a way that downplays communal targeting and instead highlights alleged actions of the victims, it creates an environment where hostility against a particular community is normalised and insufficiently addressed. It also discourages victims from seeking redress, as their experiences are either dismissed or reinterpreted. Taken together, the public statements blaming Hindu devotees, the minimisation of violence during a major Hindu festival, and the broader pattern of downplaying and misrepresenting incidents involving Hindus demonstrate clear markers of anti-Hindu prejudice in public discourse. By reframing targeted violence as the fault of the victims and consistently obscuring its communal nature, such narratives contribute to the erosion of accountability and the normalisation of hostility toward Hindu religious identity. Accordingly, this case has been recorded in the Hinduphobia Tracker database.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
State and Establishment
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
female
Sources 
