Leftist journalist downplays anti-Hindu violence in Bengal's Murshidabad, shields the rampaging Muslim mobs
India 
14 April, 2025
Case Summary
Just days after West Bengal was rocked by violent protests led by Islamist mobs over the Waqf Amendment Act, former NDTV anchor and self-styled journalist Ravish Kumar leapt to their defence, dismissing reports of the violence as exaggerated and unreliable. Using his YouTube platform—often seen as a vehicle for left-leaning narratives—Kumar claimed that reports emerging from the state should not be trusted, branding them as the product of so-called "Godi media," a term he uses for media outlets that do not reflect his ideological leanings. He urged viewers to withhold judgment and wait for the situation to "settle" before reacting to the disturbing accounts pouring in. Kumar’s attempt to undermine the gravity of the situation is particularly striking in the face of harrowing testimonies from Hindu victims in Murshidabad. These accounts paint a chilling picture of targeted violence, with radical Muslim mobs singling out Hindus over their faith and retaliating against them for the Centre's decision to amend the Waqf Act. On 11th April, 2025, widespread violence against Hindus erupted in the Murshidabad district of West Bengal following the conclusion of Jumma Namaz under the pretext of protests against the Waqf Amendment Act. Large Muslim mobs turned violent in several areas, leading to the disruption of public order. The unrest was coordinated, with mobs assembling in parts of the district shortly after prayers, leading to the rapid deterioration of law and order. Notably, amidst the general disorder, there was a clear and calculated effort to single out and target Hindus under the guise of protest. There were also local reports of attacks on multiple Hindu temples across Murshidabad during the course of the unrest. Incidents of idol desecration were noted. Authorities imposed prohibitory orders under Section 144 and deployed additional police forces to control the situation. As a result of this orchestrated anti-Hindu aggression, thousands of Hindu residents were forced to flee their homes in Murshidabad. The violence, carried out in the name of opposing the Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2025, also claimed three lives, further highlighting the communal nature of the assault. The contrast between Kumar's dismissal of the violence and the victim accounts raised questions about his perspective on the unrest. While he downplayed the severity of the situation, the accounts from the ground presented a grim reality, highlighting the fear and suffering experienced by the affected communities in West Bengal.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the prime category- Hate Speech against Hindus. The sub-category selected is- Denial or mocking of genocide/large-scale persecution. Denial or mocking of genocide/large-scale persecution/ethnic cleansing refers to the act of denying or minimizing the fact of the ethnic cleansing and/or genocide and/or religious persecution of Hindus. This often involves denying the scale, mechanisms, religious intent, or even the occurrence of the ethnic cleansing and/or genocide and/or religious persecution of Hindus. Hate speech of this kind involves the dissemination of falsehoods that deny or distort established historical facts or mock the suffering of Hindus by saying that they deserved the persecution, motivated by Hinduphobia. Denying such atrocities is not only about the denial of facts or rewriting/revising history, but it also delegitimises the religiously motivated persecution of Hindus, the religious hate/motivation/animosity that led to the persecution, and dehumanises Hindus as a religious group. Such denial of ethnic cleansing and/or genocide and/or religious persecution of Hindus not only denies the suffering but also paves the way for future/present atrocities and hate speech, inciting prejudice and violence against Hindus. It also provides a justification for violence by delinking religious animosity from religiously motivated crimes committed against Hindus. Since such denial and/or mocking of genocide/ethnic cleansing/atrocities motivated by religious animosity leads to present and future ramifications of creating more hate speech, violence, dehumanisation and delegitimisation, it would be considered hate speech under this category. The second sub-category selected is- Anti Hindu subversion and prejudice. Within this, the tertiary category chosen 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 warrants serious attention due to the deliberate and systematic denial of the Islamist violence faced by Hindus in West Bengal's Murshidabad district. The assertions made by Ravish Kumar trivialise and dismiss the lived trauma of Hindu victims by framing the reports as exaggerated and unreliable, and branding them as mere propaganda. Such a narrative not only whitewashes the real and well-documented atrocities committed against Hindus during the unrest but also vilifies any attempt to highlight or discuss these incidents, effectively silencing the victims and invalidating their suffering. By downplaying the scale and communal nature of the violence and refusing to acknowledge the religious motivations behind the attacks, Ravish Kumar's statements echo a broader pattern of diminishing or mocking large-scale persecution. This not only erodes public empathy for the victims but also actively contributes to a climate of denial and apathy. The selective outrage and ideological bias at play also reflect a deeper prejudice in how Hindu suffering is often treated in public discourse—ignored, minimised, or misrepresented. By presenting a distorted version of events and accusing independent reportage of bias without addressing the communal and religious targeting involved, the narrative not only misleads the public but also emboldens further hostility by refusing to call out religiously motivated aggression. In doing so, it contributes directly to a climate where Hindus are dehumanised and their persecution downplayed, qualifying this case as a deeply troubling example of anti-Hindu hate speech and media manipulation.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Others
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
