The host Saurav Sharma generalised the incidents of violence, attributing blame solely to Muslims and portrayed them as extremists and aggressors; this narrative emerged following a tragic event on October 13, when tensions during a Durga Puja immersion procession escalated into violence in Bahraich, Uttar Pradesh
On October 21, Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) filed a complaint against India TV host Saurav Sharma with the channel. In the 34:25-minute episode of “Coffee Par Kurukshetra,” Sharma deliberately targeted the Muslim community, propagated anti-Islam theories, and spread a divisive agenda. The show, featuring guests including Professor Sangeet Ragi, framed Muslims in a negative light and attempted to reinforce harmful stereotypes by labeling Muslim-majority areas as “sensitive.”
CJP highlighted in its complaint that the show titled “Coffee Par Kurukshetra: ???? ??? ?????????? ?? ??? ???? ?? ??? UP Bahraich Violence | CM Yogi”, was surrounding the ongoing tension erupted in Bahraich’s Maharajganj area in Uttar Pradesh.
As per CJP’s complaint to channel, the ‘Coffee Par Kurukshetra’ show on India Tv, host Sharma targeted the Muslim community, propagated anti-Islam theories and spread a divisive agenda. Based on the premise set through the details of multiple incidents across the country, chosen specifically to paint the Muslim community as aggressive, the impugned show begins. The participants present during the show were: Professor Sangeet Ragi (Professor, Political Science Delhi University, Pradeep Singh, Shantanu Gupta and the show began with host Saurav Sharma introducing the topic of Bahraich violence before the guests. The narrative consistently framed Muslims and Islamophobic propaganda in a way that reinforced negative stereotypes. Muslim majority areas were labelled as “sensitive” solely because of their demographic composition, fuelling a false narrative about the Muslim population, their festivals, and religious practices.
Further, the guests urged Hindus to oppose the Azaan and emphasizing exaggerated or imagined threats from the Muslim community, the narrative deepened divisions and heightened communal tensions. This deliberate framing contributed to a more polarized atmosphere, fostering mistrust and hostility between communities.
In complaint, CJP stated that “Professor Ragi’s remarks, invoking Maharshi Arvind to suggest that Hindus will eventually need to “take sticks and come out on the streets” to confront the “mind-set of Islam,” are profoundly dangerous. By portraying Muslims as enemies of the country and framing violence as an inevitable and even necessary response, Ragi is fuelling communal hatred and inciting potential violence.”
It was contention of the CJP that the host failed to intervene as participant Professor Sangeet Ragi made provocative statements intended to pit the Hindu community against the Muslim community. Instead of challenging these divisive remarks, host Saurav Sharma reinforced them by citing a Dainik Bhaskar report about a religious flag being hoisted in Amroha. Ragi immediately corrected him, stating that the flag had actually been raised on a temple, further spreading misinformation, as CJP highlighted in its complaint.
One panellist, Shantanu Gupta, also remarked during the show that“we are hearing Namaaz five times and what are we hearing in Namaaz five times, ‘Allah is the greatest no other god is worthy of worship’, which means no other god is worthy of worship. We are hearing this five times, and what are we saying, Mata ki Jai and in this we are not saying anything against anyone, but what are they saying in Azaan, ‘No other god is worthy of worship.”
CJP pleads in its complaint that Shantanu Gupta’s claims are not only false but also indicative of a broader misinformation campaign aimed at inciting communal tensions. His assertion that B.R. Ambedkar identified three specific reasons for conflict between Hindus and Muslims is misleading and taken out of context. Moreover, Gupta’s interpretation of Islamic practices, particularly the wording of the Azaan, is deeply flawed. The Azaan is a call to prayer that expresses the oneness of God, not a declaration of animosity towards other faiths. This misrepresentation distorts the essence of religious practices and fosters an unnecessary narrative of hostility. By framing the Azaan as inherently exclusive or provocative, Gupta perpetuates divisive stereotypes that further alienate communities and stoke fear.
CJP pointed out that this kind of rhetoric not only deepens divisions between communities but also legitimises vigilantism and mob justice under the guise of protecting Hindu interests. His suggestion that society will awaken and take matters into its own hands without reliance on political or organisational structures is a direct call for unchecked aggression, promoting an atmosphere where law and order are abandoned in favour of violent confrontation. Such statements are not just provocative but perilous, as they incite societal unrest, encourage hatred, and could lead to widespread violence against the Muslim community.
In complaint, CJP stressed that “According to the guidelines of the News Broadcasting Digital Standards Authority (NBDSA), hosts are expected to maintain neutrality and avoid favouring one community over another. However, this expectation was clearly not met. As evidenced by the videos and highlighted statements, both the host and participants seemed focused on questioning whether Hindus in India should “open their eyes” to the so-called “agenda of Muslims.” As an anchor of a news channel, which is supposed to uphold a neutral and unbiased theme, Sharma failed to introduce any non communal topics into the debate.”
Courtesy : Sabrang India
Note: This news is originally published in sabrangindia.in and was used solely for non-profit/non-commercial purposes exclusively for Human Rights
