A backlash over “I Love Muhammad” slogans has drawn a sharp response from BJP leader Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi, who warned that turning faith and identity into tools of chaos is unacceptable. He affirmed that as a Muslim, his commitment to the Prophet Muhammad is integral to his belief and cannot be manipulated by hypocrisy or disorder.
The controversy traces back to a Barawafat procession in Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, where a banner reading “I Love Muhammad” was erected along the route. Local Hindu groups objected, arguing that introducing new expressions into traditional religious processions violated norms. That dispute escalated after police intervened, leading to FIRs registered under sections related to disturbing communal harmony—but not, authorities emphasised, for the slogan itself.
Proponents of the slogan defended it as a peaceful expression of devotion, not a provocative act. Asaduddin Owaisi, president of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen, took to social media declaring “I Love Mohammad” is not criminal and tagging Kanpur police in his post.
The slogan has since spread beyond Kanpur. In Uttar Pradesh’s Unnao district, youths staged processions holding “I Love Muhammad” placards, prompting clashes with police and resulting in multiple FIRs and arrests. In Bareilly, Muslim women organised a peaceful protest at the Vidhan Bhavan gate, highlighting what they saw as intimidation over top-down policing of religious expression.
Beyond Uttar Pradesh, agitation has been reported in Nagpur, Maharashtra, and Kashipur in Uttarakhand. In Kashipur, an unauthorised procession led to stone-pelting and confrontation with law enforcement. In Maharashtra’s Nagpur, protestors gathered in the Mominpura area under leadership from local religious and political figures.
In Gujarat’s Godhra, authorities paraded Muslim youths accused of posting reels featuring the slogan and arrested several individuals. The incident intensified debate over whether the state was criminalising religious sentiment.
Naqvi’s intervention comes as tensions over the slogan show signs of deepening. In a statement, he said faith and identity must not be held hostage to chaos or hypocrisy. He emphasised it is wrong to weaponise devotion, and that using religious identity to stir disorder is unacceptable. Analysts interpret his words as pushing back against polarising narratives emerging in public discourse around the protests.
Critics and rights groups contend that the FIRs and policing actions risk chilling freedom of religious expression. Some legal scholars note that the banner itself was not criminalised by authorities; the case rather hinges on allegations of altering practices and damaging other groups’ posters. Others caution that protests—especially those becoming confrontational—can provoke communal tensions, making it a volatile flashpoint in an already fraught social landscape.
Rubio Affirms India’s Strategic Value in US Meeting at UNGA 