Murshidabad unrest escalated by Bangladeshi infiltrators, probe reveals explosive details

How did Bangladeshi infiltrators escalate the Waqf protests in West Bengal?

A preliminary investigation into the recent Waqf-related unrest in West Bengal‘s Murshidabad district has revealed that Bangladeshi nationals may have played a critical role in sparking and intensifying the violence. Sources familiar with the probe stated that these infiltrators were reportedly supported by local elements in the region, which allowed the situation to spiral beyond control.

The findings, based on intelligence inputs and field-level assessment by Central agencies, have been communicated to the Ministry of Home Affairs. According to senior officials, the protest — initially triggered by opposition to amendments to the Waqf Act — escalated dramatically once these infiltrators became active on the ground. Security officials deployed to restore order observed that the intensity and coordination of the violence were inconsistent with spontaneous local agitation, hinting at possible premeditated actions involving external actors.

What led to the protests in Murshidabad over the Waqf Amendment?

The unrest traces its roots to widespread dissatisfaction with proposed changes to the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2024. The Act, which governs the administration and regulation of Muslim charitable endowments, has faced political resistance in states like West Bengal, where the ruling Trinamool Congress government has publicly stated its intent not to implement the amendments. Critics of the law argue it centralises power, reduces local administrative control, and could potentially lead to arbitrary management of Waqf properties.

These apprehensions, particularly in regions with a high concentration of Waqf-owned land and significant Muslim populations, created fertile ground for protests. However, intelligence reports suggest that what began as local resistance quickly took a more organised and violent turn, especially in areas like Suti, Samserganj, Dhulian, and Jangipur.

How were the infiltrators linked to the violence?

According to multiple sources in Central law enforcement agencies, Bangladeshi nationals with possible affiliations to extremist groups managed to enter Murshidabad district — which shares a porous border with Bangladesh — and embedded themselves within protest groups. Local sympathisers are believed to have provided logistical support, including accommodation and communication tools, to these infiltrators.

The rapid escalation of violence — which included arson, attacks on police personnel, and destruction of public infrastructure — raised suspicions of external orchestration. Senior officials indicated that protestors were found to be unusually well-prepared, using petrol bombs and coordinated movement patterns that suggested military-style planning. Intelligence reports further point to the involvement of banned outfits like Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB), known for cross-border terror activities and previously implicated in similar communal flare-ups in eastern India.

Why is Murshidabad vulnerable to cross-border influence?

Murshidabad, located in central West Bengal, lies close to the India-Bangladesh international border, with several stretches lacking effective fencing and surveillance. The district has long been a hub for illicit border crossings and smuggling operations. Over the years, Indian intelligence agencies have repeatedly flagged this area for infiltration risks, particularly by elements aligned with JMB and other radical groups operating out of Bangladesh.

The vulnerability stems from multiple factors: historical ties across the border, shared linguistic and cultural traits, and socio-economic conditions that facilitate cross-border movement. Furthermore, the presence of a sizeable undocumented population in the region complicates efforts to distinguish between genuine locals and infiltrators.

What has the government’s response been?

Following the outbreak of violence on April 13, the Ministry of Home Affairs deployed Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) to assist local police in restoring order. The deployment was carried out after the Calcutta High Court directed the Centre to ensure peace in the violence-affected areas. As of April 15, over 200 individuals have been arrested in connection with the unrest, with several identified as suspected illegal immigrants.

Officials from the MHA are in regular contact with West Bengal’s Chief Secretary and Director General of Police. However, the Centre’s intervention has reignited a political debate, with the ruling state government accusing the BJP-led Centre of interfering in state affairs, while opposition parties have questioned the state’s ability to maintain law and order.

What is the broader political context?

The Waqf Amendment Act has been politically sensitive, especially in the context of West Bengal’s communal dynamics. Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has openly declared that the state will not implement the new law, positioning herself as a protector of minority rights. This stance has received support from several community leaders but has also drawn criticism from the Bharatiya Janata Party, which accuses the state government of pandering to a particular vote bank while ignoring growing security threats.

With general elections on the horizon, the political discourse around the Waqf law and associated violence is expected to intensify. BJP leaders have used the Murshidabad incident to highlight what they describe as the “deteriorating internal security situation” under the Trinamool Congress administration.

What role might JMB and other groups have played?

Intelligence officials have not ruled out the involvement of Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh, which has previously exploited border districts in West Bengal to carry out low-intensity terror operations. While formal attribution is still underway, early signs suggest that the pattern of violence bears similarities to past incidents involving the group, including targeted attacks, rapid mobilisation, and reliance on makeshift explosives.

JMB’s objectives often align with the disruption of secular governance in India and stoking communal unrest to further its radical ideology. Indian security agencies have previously dismantled modules of the group in districts such as Malda and Nadia, and the possibility of its revival in Murshidabad is being taken seriously.

What are the implications for internal security and border control?

The alleged role of foreign nationals in fuelling local protests underscores the need for enhanced border surveillance and cross-border intelligence sharing. While India and Bangladesh maintain formal security cooperation agreements, enforcement on the ground remains patchy. This incident may prompt renewed calls for technological upgrades, more fencing, and biometric identification systems in vulnerable border regions.

Security experts also argue that a comprehensive policy review is needed to address the socio-political factors that make border districts like Murshidabad susceptible to unrest. This includes strengthening local intelligence networks, improving infrastructure in border villages, and ensuring that law enforcement is not politicised.

How might this shape future policy on Waqf regulation?

While the legal debate over the Waqf Amendment Act remains unresolved, the Murshidabad violence may influence how both the Centre and state governments approach implementation. The Centre is likely to push for stricter uniformity in religious endowment management, citing the need for national security. At the same time, state governments may face increasing pressure to balance community concerns with law enforcement imperatives.

The episode may also lead to more rigorous vetting of protest activities, especially those occurring in high-risk zones. This could involve digital surveillance, tracking social media mobilisation, and closely monitoring cross-border communication.

What comes next for Murshidabad?

Murshidabad remains tense but under control following the deployment of paramilitary forces and a visible police presence. Recovery efforts are ongoing, with local authorities focused on identifying displaced families, assessing property damage, and restoring basic services. Meanwhile, security agencies are continuing to interrogate those arrested, aiming to map the infiltration network and trace external funding or ideological links.

As the investigation progresses, it is likely that more details will emerge about the operational methods of infiltrators and their collaborators. If links to banned outfits like JMB are substantiated, this could mark a significant escalation in cross-border extremist activity in the region.

The incident has reignited national discussions about the delicate balance between religious freedom, border security, and the challenges of communal coexistence. For Murshidabad — and West Bengal more broadly — the road ahead will involve a careful recalibration of political rhetoric, policy enforcement, and public trust.