From the 2002 Godhra carnage, 2020 anti-Hindu Delhi Riots, Pahalgam Islamic terror attack, brutal murder of Udaipur Hindu tailor Kanhaiyalal, to the recent lynching of Tarun Kumar by a Muslim mob in Uttam Nagar, the Islamo-leftist cabal has invariably been portraying reactionary Hindu outrage as a bigger existential threat than the Islamist attacks. In pursuit of whitewashing anti-Hindu crimes of Islamists, Islamo-leftists even resort to vilifying Hindus, overturning the entire victim-perpetrator dynamic. In this vein, leftist rag The Wire has churned out a fresh Muslim victimhood propaganda piece concerning the Tarun murder case.
The op-ed titled, “In Delhi’s Uttam Nagar, Hate is Free, But Muslim Safety Isn’t,” 2020 Delhi Riots accused professor Apoorvanand peddled the Muslim victimhood bogey, even as it is a Hindu family that has lost its son to a Muslim mob instigated by a Muslim woman who could not tolerate Holi colours splashed over her mistakenly.
“The local administration, if we are to believe it, is doing commendable work. It has ensured that the mob that wishes to massacre Muslims has not been allowed to carry out the violence it so openly desires,” The Wire article published on 18th March 2026 reads.
Apoorvanand asks a question: “But one might ask a simpler question: what happens to the members of a community who repeatedly hear slogans that threaten even their graves with desecration?”
Answering this, the Islamist sympathiser says that Hindus coming out in protests and raising aggressive slogans, including those about playing Holi with the blood of Muslims, is being tolerated by the administration because “After all, has not a Hindu died? Would the blood of other Hindus not boil?”
Apoorvanand picked the supposed demand of protesting Hindus that the police withdraw for fifteen minutes and give them a free hand, to portray Hindus as bloodthirsty mobsters baying for Muslim blood over a small matter like the lynching of a Hindu youth by a Muslim mob.
Sar tan se Juda mobs get a pass, but Hindus outraged against the lynching of Tarun Kumar is ‘call for massacre of Muslims’: The Wire projects Muslim perpetrator guilt on Hindu victims
The Wire contributor ideally expected Hindus to demonstrate tolerance, remain ensconced in their houses, and wait for Muslims to find another excuse to lynch them. Coming out on the streets, venting out anger against Islamists, and demanding action against the killers of Tarun Kumar Khatik, is not very good for India’s secular fabric, idea of India, Ganga-Jamuni Tehzeeb, and whatnot.
On one hand, Apoorvanand accuses Delhi Police of ‘cooperating’ with the Hindu protestors, whom he called a “violent mob”, on the other, he also says that the police have “not agreed to the mob’s demand that they withdraw from the scene for fifteen minutes and give the mob a free hand.”
Unlike the Hindu ‘mob’ who rage in anger, may vandalise a few properties, and pressurise the administration to take strict action against the killers of Tarun Kumar, a Muslim mob relies more on its stone-pelting and Sar Tan Se Juda expertise than the police or administration.
The 2022 Nupur Sharma episode serves as a fitting example of this. The ex-BJP leader was hounded by Islamists for simply quoting their religious text, calls for her beheading were given, riots erupted in many parts of the country, and Hindu tailor Kanhaiyalal and a Maharashtra resident, Umesh Kolhe, were brutally killed by Muslim jihadists for expressing online support to Sharma. Yet, from the judiciary to the Islamo-leftist ‘intelligentsia’, everyone blamed Nupur Sharma, essentially telling Hindus that merely quoting their scripture, not even criticising it, is a bigger problem and a justifiable excuse for Muslim mobs to run riots and behead Hindus.
There have been many occasions when Muslim politicians, particularly those from AIMIM, have threatened Hindus by saying that they would show their strength to Hindus if the police were removed for fifteen minutes. The likes of Apoorvanand have no issues then, in fact, they would even come up with justifications like the BJP-RSS have terrified Muslim ‘minorities’ to such an extent they have no option but to grow aggressive in their defence.
In the present case, Islamists, including Umardeen (49) and his son Muzaffar (25), assaulted Tarun Kumar to death after a small argument that started when a child threw a water balloon, which accidentally splashed a woman from the accused’s community. However, The Wire article does not even name the perpetrators behind Tarun Kumar’s brutal lynching.
Apoorvanand claims that Hindus killed Sikhs during the 1984 anti-Sikh riots, giving a Hindu vs Sikh spin to a violent political retribution
Ironically, The Wire author shrewdly downplays the communal nature of the lynching of the Hindu youth in Delhi’s Uttam Nagar, invoking the 1984 anti-Sikh riots to rake a communal ‘Hindu mob attacked Sikhs’ narrative, where none existed. Alongside ‘Hindu mobs’, Apoorvanand labelled the police and even the army as “accomplices of violent Hindu mobs” against Muslims.
“In 1984, not only in Delhi but in other parts of India as well, the police allowed Hindus enraged by the assassination of Indira Gandhi to loot and kill Sikhs as much as they wished. In many cases, it assisted the looters and the murderers. In the Hashimpura massacre, army personnel, along with the police, did not merely permit the mob; they themselves killed Muslims. Since Independence, Muslims have had ample experience of how the police often act as accomplices of violent Hindu mobs when violence is directed against them,” Apoorvanand writes.
In the Tarun murder case, it is apparent that the Muslim woman on whom the Holi colour splashed chose not to tolerate an innocent mistake by Hindu children residing in her neighbourhood and unleashed a Jihadi mob on the Hindu youth.
In the 1984 anti-Sikh pogrom, on the contrary, there was no communal angle. It was not Hindus who hit the streets, singling out Sikhs and lynching them. It was Congress workers, who went on to be rewarded by the party leadership, who ran riots to avenge the assassination of then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. It was not a spontaneous Hindu demonstration of rage against Sikhs, but a Congress-orchestrated massacre.
It is a well-documented fact that many Congress leaders supplied kerosene and other materials to attack and loot Sikhs to avenge Indira Gandhi’s killing. In fact, former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi has even shamelessly justified and trivialised the Congress-orchestrated anti-Sikh pogrom by saying that “When a big tree falls, the earth shakes a bit”.
The 2004 Nanavati Commission report also explicitly found that it was Congress leaders and workers who either helped or incited mobs. There was no role of the BJP-RSS or common Hindus in the violence. In fact, ordinary Hindus and RSS sheltered Sikhs, protecting them from bloodthirsty mobs of Congress workers.
Moreover, it is quite audacious of a known BJP-detractor like Apoorvanand to mention the Hashimpura massacre to suggest that Hindu mobs and police have historically been complicit when it comes to targeting Muslims, since it was not a case of Hindu-police complicity but Congress’s ‘secular’ crime.
On 22nd May 1987, Uttar Pradesh Provincial Armed Constabulary (UP-PAC) entered the communally tense Hashimpura area, took around 50 young Muslim men in a truck to the Upper Ganga Canal and shot them dead while tossing their bodies into the water, killing 42 of them. This brutality was not committed by Hindus but by police officials at the behest of the Congress government.
Giving the massacre a communal colour to vilify Hindus and shift the blame of Congress party’s misdeeds on the Hindus only shows the desperation of the likes of Apoorvanand to pick past incidents and distort facts about them to whitewash present Islamist crimes.
Unsurprisingly, Islamist cheerleader Apoorvanand did not mention incidents wherein police fired at defenceless Hindus. Be it the 1966 Hindu massacre wherein around 3 to 7 lakh Hindus sadhus were attacked in 1966 by the Delhi police at the behest of Indira Gandhi, or the Uttar Pradesh Police’s firing on Hindu karsevaks in 1990 on the orders of Mulayam Singh Yadav.
Apoorvanand also mentioned the 2020 anti-Hindu Delhi Riots and claimed that since ‘violent’ Hindu mobs were allegedly raising “Dilli Police, lathi chalao, hum tumhare saath hain (Delhi Police, raise the stick, we are with you) slogans, the police united with Hindus to thrash Muslims.
“One might pause to ask: at what moment does a public that naturally fears the police begin to feel that the police belong to it?” Apoorvanand asks.
The answer lies in the fact that the victims seek police help, not the perpetrators. Muslim mobs which pelted stones at Hindu houses, on police personnel out there to restore law and order, and at Hindus, would obviously not say “Dilli Police lath chalao”, because they know whose actions deserve the police’s lathis and whose don’t.
However, defying logic and common sense to the extent of even communalising Indian police, which is composed of personnel from all religious backgrounds, is quite normal for Islamo-leftists as long as it contributes to the Muslim victimhood narrative.
It must also be recalled how the entire liberal-secular cabal was giving cover fire for Islamist as they wreaked havoc on the streets of Delhi against Hindus. Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia and other Aam Aadmi Party leaders, like Manish Sisodia and Sanjay Singh, had in December 2019 cast aspersions that Delhi Police, at the behest of the BJP and not the unruly mob protesting against the CAB (now CAA) set some DTC buses on fire in the national capital during the anti-CAA Jamia riots.
The Wire article further laments how Indian Muslims are not even allowed to protest against attacks on Iran, are advised to go to Iran, and police action is taken against them. However, author Apoorvanand makes no mention of how, in most such pro-Khamenei protests, Muslims themselves expressed willingness to go to the Iranian warzone and lay their lives in the cause of avenging Khamenei. Visuals of Burqa-clad Muslim women even accusing their own country’s government of ‘betraying’ Iran also surfaced online. These people having their loyalty for foreign religious leaders over their own country is not problematic for The Wire, but those criticising them are. Here too, Hindu reaction attracts more liberal outrage than Islamist action.
From sympathising with Ajmal Kasab, downplaying Islamic terror attacks, to an active role in the 2020 anti-Hindu Delhi Riots: Is Professor Apoorvanand a borderline Jihadi?
Such blatant Muslim victimhood propaganda coming from someone like Apoorvanand, who has a history of sympathising with 26/11 Mumbai Attack perpetrator Ajmal Kasab, is not surprising. The Delhi University professor, who accuses the police of being complicit in ‘Hindu mob violence’ against Muslims, himself is an accused in the 2020 anti-Hindu Delhi Riots.
One of the main accused in the Delhi riots case – Gulfisha alias Gul, who is arrested under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), had confessed to the Delhi Police, saying that the Delhi University professor Apoorvanand was the mastermind behind the conspiracy to incite riots in Delhi.
The accused had claimed Apoorvanand had prepared a Burqa-clad Khwateen team ahead of the Anti-Hindu Delhi riots. Gulfisha had disclosed that Apoorvanand had issued them an advance heads-up, presaging a riot. Furthermore, Gulfisha also added that Professor Apoorvanand also lavished praises on the students after anti-Hindu riots engulfed the national capital.
She had also said that Professor Apoorvanand had directed them that the Jamia Coordination Committee (JCC) was going to organise a movement at 20-25 places across Delhi, and the purpose of the movement was to portray the Indian government as an oppressive regime that discriminates against Muslims. “This will only happen if riots take place under the guise of the protests,” Gulfisha had quoted Professor Apoorvanand.
The Wire’s Apoorvanand passes off the Muslim mob lynching of Hindu youth Tarun in Delhi’s Uttam Nagar as a “quarrel between two families”
When it comes to pushing the Muslim victimhood bogey, even incidents where Hindus are the victims, Islamo-leftist propagandists do not shy away from weaving a warp and weft of lies. The Wire and Apoorvanand have attempted the same in the Tarun mob lynching case.
Apoorvanand downplayed the Hindu boy’s lynching as a ‘quarrel’ between two neighbouring families. With people from both sides sustaining injuries, with one death on the Hindu side.
“Friends outside India are astonished when they hear all this. They see that a quarrel occurred between two families. There was a fight. One family was Muslim and the other Hindu. People from both sides were injured. One man from the Hindu family was fatally injured. After that, almost all the members of the Muslim family were arrested. Now, surely, there will be an investigation. There will be a trial. The Muslim family, too, has its side of the story. They too were injured. After the police investigation, the court will consider every aspect and deliver its verdict. That, they say, is how things are done everywhere in the world,” Apoorvanand writes.
He also claimed that local Hindus are not outraged over Tarun’s killing and that it is only outsiders who are causing trouble. However, in conversation with OpIndia, local Hindus in Uttam Nagar expressed their anger over the mob lynching of the Hindu youth, with Hindu neighbours even alleging that the attack was pre-planned.
Before commenting on this blatant whitewashing of a mob lynching as a ‘local dispute’, it would be appropriate to get the facts about the Tarun murder case straight.
During Holi celebrations in Delhi’s Uttam Nagar on Wednesday, 4th March, a 26-year-old man named Tarun Kumar was beaten to death following a dispute sparked by an accidental splash of coloured water from a balloon. The violence erupted in the JJ Colony area of southwest Delhi during the festival.
According to the police and family accounts, an 11-year-old girl from Tarun’s family was playing Holi on her terrace and threw a water balloon, aiming at her father below. The balloon fell on the road and splashed water on a woman from a neighbouring Muslim family, leading to an argument between the two households.
The matter was resolved at first after the Hindu family apologised, but tensions escalated later that evening. When Tarun was returning home on his bike after celebrating Holi with a friend, he stopped by a group of 40-50 people belonging to the Muslim community. He was brutally assaulted with iron rods, bricks, stones, and other objects.
Apoorvanand smartly threw his weight behind his ‘friends from outside India’, to downplay the communal nature of Tarun’s killing, play the ‘Muslims too are victims’ narrative, while this equivalence is absolutely dishonest. The Hindu side has lost a son to an intolerant Muslim mob, while the accused Muslim family faced arrests and partial demolition of its illegal constructions.
In a case of pure victim inversion, there is a point in the article where Apoorvanand laments that ‘terrified’ Muslims are fleeing the locality for Eid amidst Hindu outrage over Tarun Kumar’s killing. “No one stopped them. No one even seemed to think it necessary. The police may well say that this is not their responsibility – that they are leaving voluntarily,” he wrote.
What does Apoorvanand even expect? Local Hindus go around Muslim houses, check on their well-being, apologise for being enraged over the killing of an innocent Hindu man, raise funds for the accused Muslim family to fight the court case against the deceased Hindu youth’s family, or form a ‘human chain’?
Moving ahead, The Wire piece raises some questions that have quite elaborately and in a very violent fashion been answered by the very people it defends and paints as victims.
“But when a Muslim is killed, do neighbouring Muslims begin to demand that Hindu houses be demolished? Does the administration demolish the houses and shops of the accused Hindus? Do Muslim organisations begin to incite violence against Hindus? Does the media launch a campaign of propaganda against Hindus? We know the answer,” The Wire article reads.
From the brutal killings of Hindu tailor Kanhaiyalal in Rajasthan’s Udaipur and Umesh Kohle, a veterinary medical shop owner in Maharashtra’s Amravati by Islamic jihadis for supporting ex-BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma, shooting down of Head Constable Ratan Lal by a Muslim mob in Delhi Chand Bagh during 2020 anti-Hindu riots, brutal murder of IB officer Ankit Sharma by Muslim rioters, Kishan Bharwad, Praveen Nettaru in Karnataka, Ram Gopal Mishra in UP’s Bahraich, to Tarun Kumar in Delhi’s Uttam Nagar, the list is endless.
Islamists attack Hindus using trivial excuses, often store stones and petrol bombs on rooftops, to attack the police when it arrives to arrest Muslim perpetrators, and unlike Hindus, they don’t wait for the administration to demolish Hindu houses, they take the task upon themselves.
Also, Islamist organisations and politicians have consistently been inciting Muslims to run riots. The anti-Hindu mob violence against Hindus in West Bengal during an anti-Waqf protest exemplifies that Islamists do not even need the excuse of any Hindu provocation to attack Hindus. It was seen how AAP leader Amanatullah Khan sought police protection for AAP councillor and Delhi Riots accused Tahir Hussain, who admitted to having the intention of “teaching Hindus a lesson”. In fact, AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan himself was a part of the mob that turned violent. There are Muslim organisations, Islamist individuals, and an entire Islamo-leftist ideological ecosystem that shields, glorifies and even provides legal assistance to Muslim rioters.
But Apoorvanand, who is either living in a cave or has deliberately turned a blind eye to Muslim intolerance of Hindus, fails to see the obvious.
However, such blatant projection of Muslim guilt onto Hindus, coming from The Wire, is not surprising given the leftist rag has a history of peddling anti-Hindu narratives and platforming rioters and anti-national elements like Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam as contributors.
Towards the end of the propaganda piece, Apoorvanand stresses that “propagation of hatred against Muslims is a crime”, but for him, propagation of hatred against Hindus is not. For The Wire, the reactionary anger of Hindus towards Islamists is a ‘crime’, but Muslims killing Hindus driven by their religious intolerance is just a ‘quarrel’ or a ‘local dispute’. This is how it has always been for the Islamo-leftist ecosystem.
Godhra, Pahalgam, Red Fort blast to Tarun mob lynching: Leftists have long been in the business of projecting Muslim guilt on Hindus
Right after the Pakistan-sponsored Islamic terror attack in Pahalgam in April last year, wherein Jihadis singled out Hindus, demanded Kalma recitation, checked Hindu male tourists for circumcision to confirm their religious identity before shooting them dead, there was a natural anger over how Islamic Jihadis are absolutely intolerant of innocent Hindus. Much of this anger was also fuelled by Muslims downplaying the religiosity of the attack and distancing Islam from even at it was a religiously-motivated attack. Back then, the entire left-liberal cabal peddled an Islamophobia bogey, making it a bigger issue than the killing of Hindus for being Hindus.
A similar pattern was seen after the Red Fort blast in November 2025, when many people expressed unwillingness to trust Muslims, give them flats on rent or visit Muslim doctors, after a young Muslim doctor, Umar Un Nabi, carried out a Fidayeen attack to kill kafirs. It was very natural for people with sane minds to be fearful and have reservations about associating with Muslims in any way, since even highly-educated doctors turned out to be self-blowing Jihadis and using their education for planning bioterror attacks.
This, however, is not a new pattern. This has been ongoing since the 2002 Godhra riots. The trigger of the violence, the burning alive of 59 Hindus returning on a train from Ayodhya, by a Muslim mob in a premeditated conspiracy, was almost erased from public memory, and only the reactionary violence was highlighted to establish the narrative that it was Hindus who randomly attacked innocent and defenceless Muslims.
Over the years, many sympathy-evoking and guilt-tripping articles were floated by the Islamo-leftist ecosystem, crying over how Hindus are becoming intolerant and violent in response to Muslim mob violence, Islamic terror attacks, and Islamists mocking Hindu beliefs and traditions.
Take the case of Congress and the extended liberal ecosystem defending Muslim men who ate non-veg biryani and threw chewed bones into the waters during an iftar party on a boat in the holy Ganga River, with the ‘Hindus immerse ashes in Ganga’ fallacy. Basically, Islamists can commit jihadi attacks, mob lynch Hindus, and do things to deliberately offend Hindus, but Hindus must never object. They must tolerate the intolerance of Islamists.
Apoorvanand’s The Wire piece is in continuation of this pattern of leftist propaganda machinery peddling Muslim victimhood bogey right after the Islamist mob commits violence against Hindus.
Islamist sympathiser Apoorvanand concludes his propaganda piece in The Wire with a question: “Eid is only a few days away. Is it honourable for any society that its neighbour should await a festival not with joy but with the fear of violence? What do the Hindus of Uttam Nagar, of Delhi, of India think?”
It would, however, have been better if The Wire and Apoorvanand asked Muslims if it was honourable for any society that its neighbour has lost their son to a brutal Muslim mob attack on the joyous festival of Holi?
We know what the Muslims of Uttam Nagar, of Delhi, of India think, but seeking an answer to this question directly from the very people leftists defend with every fibre of their being, would have their delusions about ‘Hindu-Muslim unity’, ‘peace’, ‘secularism’ and ‘idea of India’ shattered.
