Sign In
By signing in or creating an account, you agree with Associated Broadcasting Company's Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.
By signing in or creating an account, you agree with Associated Broadcasting Company's Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.
New Delhi: Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind president Mahmood Madani has stirred a major controversy after asserting that “if there is oppression, there will be jihad,” while alleging that both the government and judiciary are failing to uphold minority rights. His comments have prompted sharp counterattacks from BJP leaders, who have accused him of incitement and undermining constitutional institutions.
Madani criticised recent court ruling, including those in the Babri Masjid and triple talaq matters, claiming they reflected judicial decisions made “under government pressure.” He argued that multiple verdicts in recent years have “openly violated the rights of minorities guaranteed in the Constitution.”
Referring to cases proceeding despite the Places of Worship Act, 1991, he said such developments signalled a worrying shift. “The Supreme Court is entitled to be called ‘Supreme’ only as long as the Constitution is protected there,” he remarked. “If this does not happen, then it does not deserve to be called supreme even in a non-remnant.”
Madani also assessed public perceptions of Muslims, claiming that 10 per cent of the population is supportive, 30 per cent holds negative views, and the remaining 60 percent is neutral or silent. He urged Muslims to engage with this silent majority to counter misinformation. “If these 60 per cent people turn against Muslims, then there will be a big danger in the country,” he warned.
Madani accused the media and government of distorting the idea of jihad through terms such as “love jihad,” “spit jihad,” and “land jihad.” He insisted that “Jihad was and will always remain holy,” adding that Islamic texts describe it as a force for moral good. Continuing his argument, he reiterated, “If there is oppression, then there will be jihad.”
He, however, clarified that India’s democratic structure does not permit any violent interpretation, stressing that Muslims remain committed to the Constitution. He emphasised that it is the government’s duty to ensure the protection of citizens’ rights, saying that “if the government doesn’t do this, then the government is responsible.”
Madani also triggered debate with his stand on Vande Mataram. “A dead community surrenders,” he said, warning against uncritical acceptance. “If they say ‘say Vande Mataram,’ they will start reading it. This will be the identity of a dead community. If we are a living community, we will have to face the situation.”
BJP MLA Rameshwar Sharma launched a blistering attack on Madani, accusing him of provoking Muslims and targeting key institutions. Sharma alleged that “new Jinnahs are emerging in India who are trying to provoke the country’s Muslims,” and urged the Supreme Court to take suo motu action.
Escalating his criticism, Sharma charged Madani with “violating the Constitution” and “challenging the Supreme Court.” He warned him to “stay within limits.” He further alleged that individuals like Madani “produce terrorists, jihadists, rapists,” support campaigns such as “love jihad, land jihad, and thook jihad,” and then expect leniency from the judiciary.
He added, “Will you spread terrorism, kill innocents in India, and expect the Supreme Court to reward you? The Supreme Court will hang you.” Sharma argued that strict action — including sedition-like provisions — should be invoked against anyone who “violates the Constitution or questions the judiciary.”
Reiterating that India would not tolerate anti-national behaviour, he said, “If your children become doctors, the country will salute you. But if they become doctors who throw bombs, they will also be blown up by bombs.” He insisted the government would not “feed sweets to terrorists,” and advised Madani to “stay within his limits” and avoid questioning the Supreme Court.
