BJP Accuses Mamata Banerjee of Backing Waqf Act Protest Violence; West Bengal CM Rejects Allegations

The political landscape in West Bengal turned tense once again as the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) launched a scathing attack on Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, accusing her of directly supporting and inciting recent violence that erupted during protests against the Waqf (Amendment) Act. The BJP also alleged that the Trinamool Congress (TMC)-led state government had failed in its constitutional duty to maintain law and order, particularly when it came to safeguarding the Hindu community in violence-hit regions such as Murshidabad.

At a press conference held on Saturday at the BJP headquarters in New Delhi, party spokesperson Pradeep Bhandari addressed the media and laid out what he described as a “clear chronology” of events leading up to the unrest. According to Bhandari, the situation escalated after Chief Minister Banerjee publicly voiced her opposition to the Waqf legislation. He claimed that this stance signaled tacit support to those who later engaged in violent demonstrations across parts of the state.

“The chronology is clear,” Bhandari stated. “After CM Mamata Banerjee openly declared her opposition to the Waqf (Amendment) Act, her close associate and state minister Siddiqullah Chowdhury took the rhetoric further. Chowdhury incited the mob by stating that he is protected by the Chief Minister, sending a dangerous message to radical elements across the state — that they had the blessings of the highest office in West Bengal.”

He went on to claim that such comments not only emboldened protestors but also led to lawlessness in several areas, including Murshidabad, where incidents of violence reportedly took place. The BJP leader accused the state government of “turning a blind eye” to these developments and alleged that there was a deliberate inaction when it came to protecting members of the Hindu community who were affected.

“There is a pattern here. Whenever matters of law and order come up — particularly when they involve communal tensions — the state government chooses to appease one section over the other. This is dangerous not just for Bengal, but for the nation as a whole,” Bhandari added.

He further questioned the intent behind Mamata Banerjee’s vocal opposition to the Waqf amendments, asking whether it was rooted in genuine legal concern or aimed at political mobilization ahead of the elections.

The BJP’s sharp criticism comes amid growing unrest in certain districts of West Bengal following the Centre’s move to introduce amendments to the Waqf Act. The changes aim to bring more transparency and regulation to waqf properties, but they have drawn opposition from several quarters, including the TMC. Critics of the amendments claim that the changes undermine minority rights and community-led governance of religious assets.

In response to the BJP’s allegations, Mamata Banerjee’s camp dismissed the accusations as politically motivated. Sources within the TMC maintained that the chief minister has always condemned violence and urged for peace and harmony across all communities.

TMC leaders also countered that BJP’s narrative is part of a larger strategy to polarize voters and create communal tension in the state. They accused the saffron party of trying to deflect from pressing economic and social issues by focusing on divisive politics.

“Mamata Banerjee has always stood for the secular fabric of this country. To suggest that she supports violence is not just false — it is defamatory,” a senior TMC leader said. “This is yet another attempt by the BJP to communalize a complex issue and score political points.”

Meanwhile, political analysts say the situation reflects the deepening fault lines between the ruling TMC and the BJP, which has been aggressively trying to expand its footprint in West Bengal over the past few years. With the Lok Sabha elections on the horizon, both parties are ramping up their rhetoric, and issues like the Waqf Act have become rallying points for broader ideological battles.

As tensions continue to simmer, all eyes are on how the state administration manages the law and order situation in the coming days — and whether political leaders from both sides can engage in constructive dialogue or allow the situation to escalate further.