The violence reported during the Eid-Milad procession in Bengaluru’s Basavanagudi area has triggered serious questions over the police handling of the incident. Video footage circulating from the spot appears to show members of the Islamic community attacking Hindu youths, including an assault with a rod. Yet, despite the visual evidence being discussed publicly, the subsequent police action has reportedly resulted in the Hindu victims and those who protested the incident being booked in cases related to communal enmity and obstruction.

As per the News 18 reports, the incident reportedly began with a confrontation during the Eid-Milad procession on N.R. Road, where Rashtraraksana Pade activist Murali was struck on the head with a rod by a few radical Islamists during the Eid procession. Following the clash, organization leader Puneeth Kerehalli and others staged a protest at the location, leading to heightened tension and the deployment of additional police personnel.

According to the reported FIR details, a case alleging promotion of communal enmity has been registered against Puneeth Kerehalli, Gopi Gowda, Puneeth Gowda, Vinod Nayak, and others. Kerehalli, Gopi Gowda, and Vinod Nayak were subsequently arrested in connection with the case.

After a strong warning from the Hindu organizations, a second FIR has reportedly been registered against Kamal Pasha, Abubakar Siddique, and Syed Anas under provisions relating to attempted murder and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Police have arrested three Islamists in that case, who are reportedly minors.

The central concern, however, is whether the police investigation is adequately accounting for what is visible in the available video footage. If the footage clearly establishes that Islamist individuals initiated or participated in an assault, those actions must be investigated independently of the identity of the persons who later protested against the violence. A victim should not be transformed into an accused merely because he protested after being brutally attacked by radicalists.

Law enforcement must ensure that the investigation is based on evidence rather than on the competing narratives of the Islamist groups involved. Every person shown attacking another individual in verified footage must be identified and investigated, while those who committed no offense should not be criminalized simply for raising their voice against an assault.

This is not the first time Puneeth Kerehalli has been targeted by the police; he was previously arrested after raising concerns over illegal Bangladeshi settlements in Bengaluru. This case clearly shows how a ruling Congress party can target and act against Hindu groups instead of taking strong action against those Islamists accused of brutally attacking Hindu organization members, an assault that could potentially have resulted in death. Puneeth Kerehalli is an activist, and the police should not arrest him simply for raising his voice against the incident. Those Islamist minors accused of carrying out and escalating the attack should be punished, not those who protested against it. This reflects the Congress government’s appeasement politics, where, instead of filing strong cases against those accused of the attack, action was taken against Hindu activists after they demanded a second FIR.