West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Wednesday addressed over 10,000 Imams and members of the Muslim community at the Netaji Indoor Stadium in Kolkata. The event was an Imam Conference, where Mamata spoke for 46 minutes—focusing largely on opposition to the Waqf Amendment Act.

In today’s episode of DNA, Rahul Sinha analyses Mamata Banerjee’s Hindu-Muslim speech amid the exodus of Hindus in Murshidabad.

In her speech, Banerjee mentioned the Constitution 25 times, used the word ‘Hindu’ 20 times, ‘Muslim’ 17 times, and ‘Waqf’ 16 times. She said ‘peace’ 13 times and ‘riot’ 12 times. However, Chandan Das and Hargobind Das, both killed in the recent Murshidabad violence, were not mentioned until the final minute of her speech. 

WATCH Full Episode Here:

ममता के ‘हिंदू-मुस्लिम’ वाले भाषण का विश्लेषण

‘हिंदू राष्ट्र’ के लिए ‘धधकते’ नेपाल का DNA टेस्ट

उत्तरकाशी में ‘चमत्कार वाली सुरंग’ तैयार

देखिए #DNA LIVE Rahul Sinha के साथ#ZeeLive #ZeeNews #DNAWithRahulSinha #MamataBanerjee @RahulSinhaTV https://t.co/YcLOtDPHmd
— Zee News (@ZeeNews) April 16, 2025

The CM did not speak about the Bengal police, which were accused of inaction during the riots. However, she took aim at the BSF, which was deployed in Murshidabad to restore order. Mamata Banerjee mentioned the BSF seven times, questioning their role, even though locals say the BSF brought back peace after 72 hours of violence. 

Banerjee spoke about Bangladesh five times, but only briefly referred to the violence in Murshidabad. She said nothing about victims like Sumitra Ghosh, who lost ₹5 lakh in savings to arson, or Rita, whose ₹2 lakh—saved for her husband’s treatment—was looted. Nor did she mention Shubhankar, whose home and study notes were burned down. He was preparing for the SSC exam. 

Instead, she called for protests against the Waqf law, saying, ‘Dilli Chalo.’ She invoked leaders like Tagore, Ambedkar, Gandhi, Bose, Azad, and Iqbal. Yet, she did not condemn those who turned protests violent. 

Only in the 45th minute of her speech did she announce ₹10 lakh compensation for the families of those killed in the Murshidabad riots. But families of the victims told Zee News, “We don’t want money. We want security.” They said the only sense of safety comes from the BSF camp—yet Mamata Banerjee is targeting the BSF instead of the rioters. 

Meanwhile, UP Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath had given his take on riots in just 46 seconds. Mamata used part of her 46-minute speech to respond. After that, Yogi began trending on social media in Bengal. 

A comparison of the two states also raises questions. Mamata has led Bengal for 14 years. Yogi has been UP CM for eight years. But NCRB data shows Bengal’s crime rate against women in 2022 was 71.8 per lakh women, while in UP it was 58.6. 

Kidnapping cases in Bengal were over 8 per lakh, compared to 7 in UP. Bengal also saw nearly three times more fatal attacks than UP. Attempt to murder cases stood at 12.4% in Bengal, while in UP it was just 1.6%. Bengal did better in chargesheet filing—with a 90% rate compared to 79% in UP. 

On the economic front, Bengal’s per capita income rose from ₹91,000 in 2017–18 to ₹1.54 lakh in 2023–24. UP went from ₹58,000 to ₹93,000 in the same period. But UP’s population is over 24 crore, more than double Bengal’s. 

UP contributes 8.5% to India’s GDP, while Bengal adds 5.5%. Between October 2019 and December 2024, UP received ₹15,200 crore in FDI, compared to Bengal’s ₹13,945 crore. From April to December 2024 alone, UP attracted ₹2,585 crore. Bengal didn’t feature in the top 10. 

The Murshidabad violence, triggered by protests against the Waqf law, led to BSF deployment on Calcutta High Court orders. The issue also reached the Supreme Court on Wednesday. 

A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud heard petitions challenging the Waqf Amendment Act. Senior lawyers Kapil Sibal, Rajeev Dhavan, and Abhishek Manu Singhvi opposed the law. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the Centre. 

The court raised key questions about ‘Waqf by user’—a provision that allows religious property claims without sale deeds. The bench asked, “How will centuries-old religious properties be registered without documents?” It warned that rejecting Waqf claims could trigger disputes. 

Justice Khanna asked whether properties already recognized as Waqf could now be removed. Mehta clarified that registered Waqf properties would remain untouched. Singhvi claimed nearly 4 lakh of 8 lakh Waqf properties might be lost under the new law. The Chief Justice noted, “We have been told that the Delhi High Court itself stands on Waqf land.” 

The Court condemned violence over the Waqf law, saying such acts should not occur while the matter is sub judice. The bench also asked the Centre whether Muslims could be allowed in Hindu religious trusts. 

The court may pass an interim order on three key issues on Thursday.