India on Friday firmly rejected Bangladesh’s official remarks concerning the recent violence in West Bengal’s Murshidabad district, where three individuals lost their lives amid unrest. The Indian Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) called the comments by Bangladesh “unwarranted” and “disingenuous,” accusing Dhaka of attempting to draw an unjustified parallel with India’s longstanding concerns over the treatment of minorities in Bangladesh. In a strongly worded response, MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal stated, “We reject the remarks made by the Bangladesh side with regard to the incidents in West Bengal. This is a barely disguised and disingenuous attempt to draw a parallel with India’s concerns over the ongoing persecution of minorities in Bangladesh, where the criminal perpetrators of such acts continue to roam free.” He further added that instead of indulging in “virtue signaling,” the Bangladesh government would be better served by focusing its attention on ensuring the protection of its own minority communities, which have faced increasing incidents of religious and ethnic violence over the past few years. The diplomatic exchange followed a statement made on Thursday by Shafiqul Alam, press secretary to Bangladesh’s Chief Adviser Muhammad Yunus, in which he condemned the violence in Murshidabad and called on the Indian and West Bengal governments to take appropriate measures to ensure the safety and rights of the Muslim minority population. Alam’s statement also expressed concern over what was described as a “significant loss of life and property” and urged New Delhi to uphold democratic and humanitarian values.

The violence in Murshidabad reportedly erupted during protests over the Waqf (Amendment) Act and quickly escalated, spreading to other districts including Malda, South 24 Parganas, and Hooghly. These areas witnessed widespread arson, road blockades, and stone-pelting incidents that disrupted normal life and raised tensions in an already sensitive region. According to initial intelligence and law enforcement reports, some of the violence may have involved elements from across the border, with indications that Bangladeshi miscreants may have infiltrated and aggravated the unrest. Preliminary findings further suggested that these individuals may have received initial logistical or political backing from certain local leaders, but the situation quickly spiraled beyond their control. As the situation deteriorated, India’s Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) stepped in to closely monitor developments in Murshidabad and surrounding regions. Union Home Secretary Govind Mohan held urgent consultations with West Bengal’s Chief Secretary and the Director General of Police (DGP), assuring full support from the central government and urging the state administration to intensify surveillance in vulnerable districts. He also advised West Bengal authorities to implement preventive measures and work swiftly to restore peace and normalcy on the ground.

The political and communal sensitivities surrounding the Waqf (Amendment) Act have added complexity to the unrest. The legislation has triggered protests among sections of the Muslim community in the region, who claim it undermines their rights over religious endowments and properties. Though the protests initially began peacefully, they quickly transformed into violent confrontations, fueled in part by misinformation campaigns and external provocations. The violence, which left several injured and caused extensive property damage, has reignited debates on cross-border infiltration and the influence of radical elements operating from neighboring territories.

India’s rejection of Bangladesh’s statement marks a notable escalation in diplomatic rhetoric between the two countries, which have generally maintained strong bilateral ties in recent years, especially in areas like trade, infrastructure, and regional security. However, India has consistently raised concerns over the treatment of Hindu and other religious minorities in Bangladesh, particularly during incidents of communal violence that have targeted temples, homes, and individuals. The MEA’s latest response appears aimed not only at defending India’s internal affairs but also at sending a message that any attempt by Dhaka to leverage domestic Indian events for political optics will be met with a firm counter. Analysts believe the response is also a strategic move to reinforce India’s broader stance on minority rights and to remind Bangladesh of its international obligations in this regard.

Meanwhile, security forces in Murshidabad and the surrounding districts remain on high alert. Curfews and restrictions have been intermittently imposed to prevent further flare-ups, and additional central forces have been deployed to ensure law and order. Community outreach efforts have also been initiated to quell rumors and reassure residents, especially in communally sensitive pockets. Civil society organizations and local leaders are being encouraged to play a constructive role in restoring harmony and ensuring that the situation does not spiral into prolonged unrest.

The episode has also sparked a wider political discourse within India, with opposition parties criticizing the handling of the protests and accusing the ruling party of failing to address community grievances effectively. On the other hand, several BJP leaders have pointed to the alleged involvement of foreign elements as evidence of broader threats to national security and the need for tighter border controls. The developments in Murshidabad are now being closely watched not just for their local implications, but also for the potential diplomatic ripple effects they could have on India-Bangladesh relations in the months ahead.

As of now, both New Delhi and Dhaka appear to be standing firm on their respective positions, with no immediate signs of de-escalation in the diplomatic rhetoric. However, backchannel talks and regional cooperation forums could offer a path to easing tensions, particularly as both nations prepare for upcoming bilateral engagements and regional summits. For the moment, the Indian government has made it clear that while it is open to constructive dialogue, it will not tolerate external commentary that it views as interference in domestic matters—especially when it comes from a country grappling with its own record on minority rights.