Waqf law protests turn deadly in Bengal: Three killed, central forces rushed in after violent clashes

Why did protests against the Waqf law in West Bengal spiral into deadly violence?

Violent unrest broke out in West Bengal‘s Murshidabad district, following protests over amendments to the Waqf Act that governs the management of Muslim charitable endowments in India. The demonstrations, which started peacefully after Friday prayers, turned fatal when three people lost their lives and dozens were injured in escalating clashes. The dead included a father-son duo found with multiple stab wounds in Jafrabad and a young man fatally shot in Dhulian, both areas located within Samserganj in Murshidabad.

In response, the Calcutta High Court ordered the immediate deployment of central paramilitary forces to restore order in the violence-hit district, signalling the seriousness of the situation. The decision came after a petition filed by Leader of Opposition and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Suvendu Adhikari, who argued that the state police had failed to contain the unrest.

The protests highlight the widening political fault lines and communal tensions stirred by the recent amendments to the Waqf law, and have reignited debate over how such sensitive legislation should be implemented at the state level.

What are the recent amendments to the Waqf Act and why are they controversial?

The Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2024, passed by the Indian Parliament recently, has introduced a series of reforms that opponents claim infringe upon religious and property rights. The most controversial change empowers district collectors to resolve ownership disputes related to Waqf properties. This provision has been criticised as giving sweeping administrative control over religious trusts, potentially marginalising the role of community-based Waqf boards and local stakeholders.

Supporters of the amendments argue that the changes are aimed at bringing transparency and accountability to the management of Waqf assets, which include land, mosques, graveyards, and schools intended for charitable and religious use. Critics, however, view it as a unilateral move that bypasses consultations with religious groups and state governments. They warn it could open the door to misuse and unlawful acquisition of properties long under the jurisdiction of Muslim communities.

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has been among the most vocal opponents of the legislation. She declared that her government would not implement the amended law, calling it anti-constitutional and discriminatory. Her refusal has intensified tensions between the Centre and the state, particularly in Muslim-majority areas like Murshidabad where emotions around religious autonomy and land rights run high.

How did the violence unfold in Murshidabad and other districts?

The protests began in the Samserganj area, where a large group of Muslims assembled after Friday prayers and blocked a section of National Highway 12. The demonstration was initially non-violent but turned chaotic when agitators began pelting stones at a passing police van, leading to a clash with security personnel. Tear gas was used, and a lathi charge ensued as law enforcement attempted to disperse the crowd. Reports later confirmed injuries among at least ten police officers.

By Saturday morning, the situation had escalated dramatically. In Jafrabad, two members of the same family were found dead with stab wounds. In nearby Dhulian, a third individual succumbed to a bullet wound, although the source of the gunfire remains unclear. Senior police officers, including Additional Director General Jawed Shamim, denied that police were responsible for any shooting, stating that “minimum force” had been used and that law enforcement was not “trigger-happy.”

Across Murshidabad and parts of Malda, South 24 Parganas, and Hooghly, demonstrators blocked railway tracks, set fire to police vehicles, and vandalised public property. At Nimtita station, train services were disrupted after stones were hurled at a stationary train. By late evening, 118 individuals had been arrested, and security forces remained on high alert.

How has the political leadership responded to the crisis?

Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, in a post on social media, appealed for peace and restraint. Writing in Bengali, she urged people of all faiths to avoid “irreligious behaviour in the name of religion” and not to “incite riots for political gain.” She reiterated her government’s opposition to the Waqf amendments, stating that the law would not be implemented in West Bengal.

Her stance has drawn sharp criticism from the BJP, which blamed the violence on what it called the “appeasement politics” of the Trinamool Congress. Union Minister and state BJP president Sukanta Majumdar accused the state administration of failing to protect Hindus in the affected areas and suggested that the violence was premeditated.

BJP IT cell head Amit Malviya went further, alleging that Mamata Banerjee had deliberately provoked discontent over the Waqf law for political mileage. He claimed the Chief Minister’s statements and refusal to enforce a law passed by Parliament had contributed directly to the unrest. “She bears full responsibility for the communal violence and the tragic loss of life that has followed,” he wrote in a post on X (formerly Twitter).

What steps has the judiciary taken to address the unrest?

In a decisive intervention, the Calcutta High Court ordered the deployment of Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF) in Murshidabad to contain the violence and maintain law and order. The court’s special bench, hearing Suvendu Adhikari’s petition, remarked that it “cannot keep its eyes shut” to the deteriorating situation in the region. The bench underscored the state’s responsibility to uphold peace and protect lives, especially in sensitive districts bordering Bangladesh.

Seven companies of the Border Security Force (BSF) were dispatched to support state police and re-establish normalcy. The High Court has scheduled further hearings to review the evolving situation and ensure compliance with its directives.

What is the historical and legal context surrounding Waqf property laws in India?

Waqf properties in India are governed under the Waqf Act, 1995, which established Waqf Boards in each state to oversee the administration and use of assets meant for charitable purposes in the Muslim community. These properties often date back centuries and are regarded as sacrosanct trusts. However, poor documentation, disputed ownership, and allegations of mismanagement have plagued the Waqf system for decades.

Periodic attempts at reform have met with strong resistance. Critics of past and present amendments argue that centralising control undermines religious freedoms and invites bureaucratic interference. At the same time, various government audits and judicial inquiries have revealed widespread irregularities in how Waqf assets are handled, prompting calls for stricter oversight.

The 2025 amendment follows this pattern, but it arrives in an especially polarised political environment. The Centre argues that the new provisions are essential for legal clarity and administrative control. Opposition leaders and religious organisations say the changes reflect a broader pattern of encroachment on minority rights and state autonomy.

What are the broader implications of the violence and legal standoff?

The violence in Murshidabad, and the political tug-of-war it sparked, underscores the deepening polarisation in India over laws affecting religious minorities. The situation reveals how legislative changes—particularly those touching on community governance—can inflame identity-based tensions when implemented without inclusive dialogue or transparent safeguards.

For West Bengal, which has seen repeated episodes of communal unrest in recent years, the current crisis could have lasting ramifications on interfaith harmony, law enforcement credibility, and federal relations. The state’s resistance to implementing central legislation also adds to the growing list of centre-state confrontations in Indian federal politics.

As the legal battle continues and investigations into the killings and violence unfold, the emphasis will likely shift to accountability—both in terms of law enforcement and political leadership. Whether the deployment of central forces succeeds in restoring peace without exacerbating public resentment remains a critical test for both the state and central governments.

The ongoing volatility highlights the urgent need for dialogue-driven policy reform, especially when legislation intersects with matters of faith, identity, and property. The unfolding events in Murshidabad serve as a sobering reminder that administrative decisions made in Parliament can carry life-and-death consequences on the ground.