Bareilly, 11 Oct

A fact-finding report by the Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR) has raised serious concerns over the conduct of police and administrative authorities in Bareilly during and after a protest on 26 September, 2025. The protest, led by Bareilly cleric and Ittehad-e-Millat Council (IMC) Chief Maulana Tauqeer Raza Khan, was organised to submit a memorandum in support of the ongoing ‘I Love Muhammad’ campaign.

The campaign itself arose from a controversy in Kanpur earlier in the month, where a banner displaying the words “I Love Mohammad” was installed during Eid-Milad-un-Nabi celebrations. Though organisers claimed to have received prior permission, local Hindutva groups objected.

Instead of addressing the disruption, police allegedly asked the Muslim organisers to remove the banner. Later, Kanpur police filed an FIR against 24 Muslims, including organisers, accusing them of inciting communal tension.

In response, Muslims across India condemned the FIR and staged peaceful protests, including the one in Bareilly. However, what began as a symbolic gathering to express support quickly escalated into a widespread crackdown by the police.

Timeline of events in Bareilly

According to the APCR report, Maulana Tauqeer Raza called for the protest on 21 September through a video message. Though permission was denied, confusion spread due to conflicting WhatsApp messages, prompting large crowds to gather after Friday prayers on 26 September near Ala Hazrat Dargah and the cleric’s residence.

While most demonstrators dispersed peacefully, some scuffles broke out. Police responded with force — invoking Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), lathicharging, deploying tear gas, and later deploying extra security force across the city.

Ten police personnel were reportedly injured, and violence spread to multiple areas including Civil Lines and Bansmandi.

The following day, Maulana Tauqeer Raza was arrested and sent to 14-days in judicial custody and named in at least seven FIRs. An SIT was constituted to investigate the events.

By 7 October, police had arrested 89 individuals, filed 10 FIRs, and demolished or sealed multiple properties allegedly linked to those accused. Internet services were suspended in Bareilly Division from 1 to 4 October, citing “security concerns” ahead of Dussehra.

Findings: Excessive force and legal irregularities

The APCR report alleges a disproportionate and punitive response by authorities, revealing a pattern of targeting Muslims through arbitrary arrests, misuse of legal provisions, and property demolitions.

Key findings include:

• Disproportionate legal charges: FIRs accessed by the APCR fact-finding team present a "skewed version of events," depicting peaceful assembly as criminal. Charges included severe sections like 132 (offences against the state) and 302 (murder), despite no fatalities or evidence of rebellion. The FIRs often repeated language across police stations and failed to specify individual actions.
• Lack of due process in arrests: Detainees were reportedly picked up without explanation, and families were not informed. Arrest memos and FIRs were not provided promptly. Local lawyers reported that several minors were also detained, but their location and legal status remained unclear.
• Shop sealing without notice: On 29 September, 32 shops in Pehalwaan Markaz Market — a registered Waqf property — were sealed without prior notice or legal documentation. This action occurred despite an ongoing legal stay from the Waqf Tribunal. Tenants were denied access to any official explanation.
• Targeted demolitions: Properties linked to Muslim leaders and activists were demolished or sealed, including the Raza Palace banquet hall, linked to Dr. Nafees, a close aide of Tauqeer Raza, who was in jail at the time. Other properties belonging to political figures and associates of the cleric were similarly targeted.
• Digital and physical suppression: Internet shutdowns caused disruption to daily life and business activity. Muslim-dominated localities witnessed heavy police presence, in stark contrast to Hindu-majority areas which remained unaffected.

Political interference

The APCR report also noted that political delegations from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and Samajwadi Party (SP) were prevented from entering Bareilly to assess the situation. Several leaders were placed under house arrest. A petition has since been filed with the State Human Rights Commission challenging the legality of the demolitions and arrests.

A pattern of suppression

In the 30 days leading up to the Bareilly protest, authorities filed 45 FIRs in 23 cities — all against Muslims. Over 4,500 individuals were booked, of whom 265 were arrested. The APCR report argues that the government's approach has moved beyond maintaining law and order and instead shows signs of criminalising dissent and suppressing religious expression.

“The language used in FIRs paints an entire community as a dangerous mob. There's no effort to distinguish between peaceful protestors and those who may have engaged in isolated acts of unrest,” the report states.

Conclusion

The APCR concludes that the police and administration in Bareilly responded with "excessive and aggressive" force, violating legal procedures and basic civil rights. It says that what began as a peaceful expression of religious sentiment was met with crackdowns that involved arbitrary arrests, denial of due process, and punitive demolition of properties. The disproportionate response has led to widespread fear, economic loss, and a chilling effect on civil liberties.

The organisation has called for independent investigations, restoration of legal rights, and accountability from the authorities responsible for these actions.