New Delhi, April 14: Union Minister Giriraj Singh has intensified political tensions by drawing a controversial comparison between West Bengal’s Murshidabad and Kashmir in the 1990s, following a violent episode linked to ongoing protests against the Waqf Act. His remarks have triggered a political storm, placing the Trinamool Congress government under scrutiny while stirring strong reactions across party lines.
The violence in Murshidabad, which erupted amid rising dissent over the Waqf legislation, has drawn sharp criticism from Singh, who alleged that the state government led by Mamata Banerjee has failed to maintain law and order, and accused it of turning a blind eye to attacks on Hindu residents. His statements mark a stark escalation in the rhetoric surrounding the situation in Bengal, where political and religious sensitivities remain high.
Singh Alleges State Complicity in Exodus
Speaking to media on Monday, Singh questioned the West Bengal administration’s silence and likened the current situation in Murshidabad to the events that led to the mass exodus of Hindus from Kashmir three decades ago.
“The incident in Murshidabad is so horrifying that it surpasses even those in Bangladesh. And this is happening under the watch of the state government,” Singh remarked.
The Union Minister accused Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee of abdicating her constitutional responsibility, stating, “She is supposed to be the protector of all citizens. Instead, she is allowing this situation to fester. The Murshidabad incident is reminiscent of Kashmir in 1990. Will Bengal now go down the same path?”
He further claimed that the Trinamool Congress government was “complicit in encouraging an exodus of Hindus”, warning that such targeted attacks, if left unchecked, could permanently alter the region’s demographic and social fabric.
Political Accusations and Polarisation
Singh’s assertion that the West Bengal government was “sinking the boat” it is supposed to navigate adds fuel to the already volatile political atmosphere ahead of the general elections. “When the sailor sinks the boat, who will save it?” he asked, implying that the state’s administrative machinery was either paralysed or deliberately disengaged.
While Singh’s comments have been welcomed by some right-wing groups, critics have raised alarms over the communal undertone of the analogy with Kashmir, questioning whether such comparisons could worsen the situation on the ground.
Opposition Slams Centre Over Waqf Act Controversy
Amid the row, NCP (Sharad Pawar faction) MP Supriya Sule joined the debate, not by defending the Bengal government, but by turning the lens back on the Union Government’s legislative approach. Sule criticised the Centre’s hurried passage of the Waqf Act, arguing that the lack of inclusive debate and consultation has led to confusion and resentment, which is now spilling onto the streets.
“We had requested the government not to pass the legislation in haste. There was no urgency. We wanted inclusive discussions,” Sule said.
According to Sule, the government should have considered forming a joint committee similar to the One Nation, One Election panel to evaluate the implications of the Waqf law across religious and regional lines before implementation.
What Triggered the Unrest in Murshidabad?
Murshidabad district has witnessed days of unrest, with several incidents of violence, property damage, and allegations of communal targeting reported. The epicentre of the agitation appears to be linked to the provisions in the Waqf Act, which many Hindu residents claim are being used to unjustly take over land and properties traditionally belonging to non-Muslims.
Although the Waqf Board is a statutory body managing religious endowments under Islamic law, in Bengal and other states it often holds large swathes of land, some of which are contested. Protesters allege that the new provisions embolden the Board to act without judicial oversight, sparking widespread fears and anger.
There have been reports of arson, intimidation, and displacement, although the state government has downplayed the scale of the unrest. The police response, viewed by many as inadequate, has further fuelled community tensions.
Mamata Banerjee’s Silence Under Fire
The West Bengal Chief Minister has not issued a detailed statement on the Murshidabad episode so far, a silence which Singh and other critics have seized upon to accuse her of apathy or selective outrage. According to Singh, her administration is not acting against perpetrators due to vote-bank politics.
Political analysts suggest that Mamata Banerjee’s restrained response could be a strategic move to avoid further communal flare-ups, but in doing so, she risks alienating a section of voters who feel unsafe or unheard.
Law and Order or Political Theatre?
The broader question that Singh’s statement brings to light is whether West Bengal is truly on a trajectory that could mirror the dark period of Kashmir in the 1990s, when lakhs of Kashmiri Hindus fled the valley due to insurgency and targeted killings.
Several commentators and community leaders have warned against making such comparisons lightly. The sociopolitical conditions in Bengal are markedly different, and equating Murshidabad’s violence to that of Kashmir might oversimplify a complex issue rooted in administrative failures, land laws, and religious sensitivities.
At the same time, the growing incidents of targeted violence and alleged demographic shifts in select regions of West Bengal have raised legitimate concerns. Political parties on both sides are now using these events as election talking points, with little focus on long-term solutions.
Centre vs State: A Familiar Battle
This episode is the latest in a long series of Centre-State clashes between the Modi-led Union government and Mamata Banerjee’s administration. Over the years, disputes have ranged from the handling of the CAA-NRC, law and order, federal agencies’ intervention in state matters, and now the Waqf Act.
BJP leaders have repeatedly accused the TMC government of shielding minority appeasement at the cost of law enforcement, while Mamata Banerjee and her allies argue that the BJP is trying to communalise state politics and erode the federal structure.
What’s Next for Murshidabad?
As tensions remain high in Murshidabad, residents are demanding stronger police action, judicial intervention, and compensation for damaged properties. Civil society groups have also called for independent investigations to determine whether there was institutional complicity or failure.
Security has been tightened in sensitive areas, but residents claim that the presence of law enforcement has been more reactive than preventive. With general elections looming, both the state and central governments will likely come under greater pressure to act decisively.
The remarks by Giriraj Singh have thrown Murshidabad’s violence into the national spotlight, drawing uncomfortable parallels with one of India’s most traumatic periods. While political leaders across the spectrum battle over narratives, the urgent need remains for restoring peace, addressing community grievances, and ensuring that law and justice are applied without bias. As Bengal navigates its internal challenges, any exaggeration or exploitation of communal tensions risks compounding an already delicate situation.
