Hindu couple's shop selectively targeted and destroyed by Islamists in the garb of ‘protests’ against Waqf law

Case ID : ea34846 | Location : Murshidabad, West Bengal, India | Date of Incident : Thu, 10 April, 2025

Case ID : ea34846

Murshidabad, West Bengal, India

10 April, 2025

Hindu couple's shop selectively targeted and destroyed by Islamists in the garb of ‘protests’ against Waqf law

Attack not resulting in death

Attacked for Hindu identity

Communal clash/attack

Case Summary

Amidst the wave of anti-Hindu violence unleashed by Muslim mobs in Murshidabad under the pretext of protesting the newly enacted Waqf Amendment Act, a Hindu couple’s shop was specifically targeted and completely destroyed. The incident took place in Samserganj, a town in the Murshidabad district of West Bengal, where the Muslim mob attacked the establishment and left it in ruins. The shop, which had served as the couple’s primary means of livelihood, was completely decimated in the course of the unrest. The shop, known locally as Subha Smriti Hotel, had been run as a sweet shop by the couple for several years. It was ransacked during the violence, with all contents, including cash, looted. The destruction has left the family without any immediate means to sustain themselves, dealing a blow to their financial stability and daily existence. On 11th April 2025, Murshidabad district in West Bengal, which has a considerable Muslim population, was rocked by large-scale violence, arson, vandalism, and targeted attacks on the Hindu community, all carried out under the pretence of protesting the newly enacted Waqf Amendment Act. In the aftermath of Jumma Namaz, mobs launched a violent rampage through the Suti and Samserganj areas, disrupting railway services, damaging public infrastructure, and paralysing daily life. The office of the Block Development Officer (BDO) was attacked with stones and sticks, contributing to the widespread chaos and fear. Notably, amidst the general disorder, there was a clear and calculated effort to single out and target Hindus under the guise of protest. Reports from the ground also indicated that Hindu temples were vandalised and idols desecrated. As a result of this orchestrated anti-Hindu aggression, hundreds of Hindu residents have been forced to flee their homes in Murshidabad. The violence, carried out in the name of opposing the Waqf (Amendment) Bill 2025, has already claimed three lives, further highlighting the communal nature of the assault.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

This case has been added to the tracker under the prime category- Attack not resulting in death. The sub-category relevant in this case is- Attacked for Hindu identity. In several cases, Hindus are attacked merely for their Hindu identity without any perceived provocation. A classic example of this category of religiously motivated hate crime is a murder in 2016. 7 ISIS terrorists were convicted for shooting a school principal in Kanpur because they got ‘triggered’ seeing the Kalava on his wrist and tilak that he had put. In this, the Hindu victim had offered no provocation except for his Hindu religious identity. The motivation for the murder was purely religious, driven by religious supremacy. Such cases where Hindus are targeted merely for their religious identity would be documented as a hate crime under this category. The second sub-category selected is- Communal clash/attack. Communal clash is a form of collective violence that involves clashes between groups belonging to different religious identities. For a communal clash between Hindus and non-Hindus to qualify as a religiously motivated hate crime, the trigger of the violence itself would have to be anti-Hindu in essence. For example, if there is a Hindu religious procession that comes under attack from a non-Hindu mob and after the initial attack, Hindus retaliate in self-defence, leading to a communal clash between the two religious communities. While at a later stage, both communities are involved in the clash/violence, the initial trigger of the violence was by the non-Hindu mob against the Hindus and therefore, it could safely be termed as an anti-Hindu violence. Further, the trigger would also have to be religiously motivated. In the cited example, the attack by the non-Hindu mob was against religious processions and therefore, can be concluded to be religiously motivated. In some cases, the trigger may be non-religious, however, it develops into religious violence against Hindus at a later stage. In such cases too, the foundational animosity towards Hindus becomes the motivating factor of the crime and therefore, it would be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime against Hindus under this category. This incident qualifies as a hate crime because the attack on the Hindu couple’s shop was not linked to any personal dispute or provocation, but rather stemmed from their religious identity. The destruction of the shop, unconnected to the Waqf Amendment Act itself, signals a deliberate attempt to harm the victims based on their identity. This pattern of targeting Hindus without provocation, driven by religious animosity, meets the criteria of a hate crime and highlights the dangers faced by individuals based on their faith alone. This incident occurred as a part of the widespread anti-Hindu violence in the Suti and Samserganj areas, where a Muslim mob disrupted train services, vandalised the Block Development Officer’s office, and brought normal life to a halt. Local reports confirmed the desecration of Hindu temples and attacks on Hindu homes, forcing hundreds to flee Murshidabad in fear. The communal nature of the violence is further reinforced by eyewitness accounts confirming that local Muslims—not outsiders—were responsible. The targeting of the Hindu Hotel is thus not just an instance of riot-related damage but a symbolic act of religious hatred and economic persecution, intended to terrorise the Hindu community and compel their displacement and justifiably warrants inclusion in the Hinduphobia tracker.