West Bengal police shield Muslim youth who shared image of child urinating on Lord Shiva, threaten Hindus instead
South 24 Parganas district, West Bengal, India 
10 July, 2025
Case Summary
In the Mandirbazar area of South 24 Parganas district, West Bengal, a Muslim youth named Madhu Molla shared an obscene and derogatory image mocking Hindu deities on social media. Hinduphobia Tracker has classified this incident as a religiously motivated hate crime targeting Hindus. Despite the seriousness of the offence, the West Bengal Police failed to take meaningful action against the accused. Instead, they issued veiled threats to Hindus, who were circulating screenshots of the derogatory image to publicly call out Madhu Molla for his blatant mockery of Hindu beliefs. The derogatory image shared by the Muslim accused depicted a child urinating on Lord Shiva, which was accompanied by an abusive caption targeting the deity’s mother. This incident triggered widespread outrage among the Hindu community, with locals promptly filing a complaint at the Mandirbazar police station. However, instead of being transparent, police deliberately didn't reveal the name of the accused and issued a vague public statement acknowledging that a “religiously offensive image” had been posted by a resident of the Mandirbazar area. The police locked the Facebook profile and removed the post, but chose not to name the Muslim accused, Madhu Molla, anywhere, despite the identity of the accused being publicly known due to a tweet posted by BJP leader Suvendu Adhikari. Furthermore, there was also no clear confirmation whether the accused was arrested or any legal action was taken against him or not, even though an FIR was filed. The police also urged people not to share the image, warning that doing so could disturb communal harmony. However, this selective caution was seen as an attempt to suppress public discourse and shield the offender. The deliberate omission of the accused's identity, the absence of timely arrest, and the advisory against sharing the image, without any visible effort to acknowledge or address the hurt caused to the Hindu community, raised serious concerns about institutional bias and inaction.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category of: - Hate speech against Hindus. Within it, the sub-category selected is: - Anti-Hindu subversion and prejudice, with the tertiary category being: - 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 added to the tracker because the West Bengal Police deliberately tried to downplay a clear instance of a religiously motivated hate crime while actively shielding the Muslim accused. They neither named the accused nor arrested him, which clearly shows their bias when it comes to protecting Muslims accused, especially when Hindus are the victims. This is on the line of the pattern where hate crimes against Hindus are either ignored, distorted, or softened under the excuse of maintaining communal harmony. This kind of downplaying often leads to the normalisation of hatred against the Hindu community and its religious symbols and legitimises future attacks by signalling to Muslim perpetrators that Hindu faith and symbols can be insulted without consequence. Furthermore, the West Bengal Police went a step further and threatened Hindus not to share the image, a move that reeks of hypocrisy and bias. While the police failed to name or arrest the offender, they were quick to warn Hindus not to circulate the image, as if the real problem was outrage over defending the faith and not the act itself. This was not a genuine appeal for peace; it was a subtle attempt to suppress discussion and escape accountability. It is not uncommon for West Bengal Police to cross state borders and arrest Hindu accused, as seen in the case of the Hindu influencer named Sharmistha. It may be recalled that instead of chasing the Muslim social media users who doxxed and gave ‘Sar Tan se Juda’ threats to the Hindu influencer, Mamata Banerjee’s police force had travelled 1500 km to Gurgaon to arrest her in May 2025. So their statement in this case wasn't a casual remark but was a veiled threat to anyone calling out their inaction. Such instances of police downplaying and whitewashing targeted violence against Hindus have been witnessed time and again in the state of West Bengal. In such cases, the police often deny or downplay the communal angle under the pretext of maintaining law and order and preventing the situation from escalating further. However, such denials often come at the cost of truth and justice for the Hindu victims. West Bengal police, especially, have a history of downplaying violence committed by the Muslim community. Over the past several years, there has been a disturbing pattern in West Bengal where incidents of targeted violence, vandalism, and intimidation against Hindus have either been downplayed, misrepresented, or outright denied by the state police and administration. This whitewashing has become institutionalised under the leadership of Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, whose government stands accused of deliberately shielding Islamist elements while clamping down on Hindu rights. A glaring example of this systemic whitewashing is evident in the handling of the Murshidabad violence, as well as multiple other incidents in Basirhat, Malda, Midnapore, and Uttar Dinajpur. In the Basirhat case (March 2025), for instance, when a Kali temple was vandalised and the idol desecrated, the police quickly dismissed the communal nature of the attack and labelled the perpetrator as “mentally unstable” without any serious investigation or due process. This is a familiar pattern used to neutralise public outrage and deflect attention from religiously motivated crimes against Hindus. In the aftermath of widespread anti-Hindu violence in Murshidabad and Malda (April 2025), which included incidents of arson, looting, and idol desecration, the West Bengal Police attempted to present the violence as “minor clashes” or “local disputes” unrelated to religion. Reports indicated that despite credible accounts of Hindu homes and temples being attacked, the police either failed to act in time or took a biased stance that allowed the violence to escalate. In many cases, police statements contradicted eyewitness reports and video evidence shared on social media. The bias of the state extends beyond inaction. There are increasing instances where the state actively suppresses Hindu religious expression. Hindus have been arrested simply for chanting “Jai Shri Ram”, a phrase vilified by sections of the administration and the ruling party. Permission for Hindu processions—especially during festivals like Ram Navami or Hanuman Jayanti- is routinely denied on grounds of "law and order concerns", while Muslim religious gatherings face no such hurdles. Moreover, over the years, the Mamata-led government has issued numerous prejudicial directives, like orders restricting Durga Puja immersions, citing Muharram processions. Inaction on anti-Hindu mob violence in areas like Dhulian, Islampur, and Kaliachak. Public endorsements and appeasement of radical clerics and Islamist leaders, while dismissing concerns raised by Hindu groups as “communal provocation”. The systematic suppression of Hindu voices, the denial of communal violence, and the criminalisation of Hindu identity expressions such as “Jai Shri Ram” reflect not just administrative failure but a deeper ideological hostility toward the Hindu community. Therefore, this case has been added to the tracker as the police functioned not as a neutral authority but as an enabling force in the erasure and minimisation of a religiously motivated hate crime. The refusal to name the accused, failure to arrest him, and the advisory issued to the public all serve as clear markers of institutional bias and complicity, reinforcing the view that hate crimes against Hindus are not taken seriously when the aggressor belongs to the Muslim community.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
State and Establishment
Perpetrators Range
N/A
Perpetrators Gender
unknown
Sources 
