India has told its Parliament that it is closely monitoring reports of violent incidents targeting minority communities in Bangladesh and has repeatedly raised concerns with Dhaka about the safety and security of these groups. In a written reply in the Rajya Sabha, the Foreign Affairs Ministry said ongoing reports of attacks on homes, properties, businesses and places of worship of minorities have been noted, and that New Delhi has consistently conveyed its concerns to Bangladeshi authorities through diplomatic channels and high-level political engagements.
In a written reply to a parliamentary query, Minister of State for External Affairs Kirti Vardhan Singh stated that India expects the interim government of Bangladesh to fulfill its responsibilities by conducting a “thorough investigation” into these incidents and ensuring that all those responsible for killings, arson, and violence against minorities are held accountable without exception.
The minister emphasised that the government “continues to monitor” these developments and has discussed them with Bangladesh’s interim leadership on several occasions. India’s position, as articulated by officials, is that the interim government in Dhaka has a responsibility to thoroughly investigate incidents of killings, arson and other violent acts against minority communities, and to ensure that those responsible are brought to justice without excuses. New Delhi has made it clear that it expects full accountability for such crimes and that the protection of all citizens, including minorities, is a fundamental duty of the Bangladeshi state.
The government’s statement reflects rising concerns in India about reports of recurring violence and the deterioration of law and order affecting vulnerable populations across the border. India has highlighted incidents reported by civil society groups and media accounts that suggest a pattern of hostile acts against minority communities, including murders and attacks on property. These publicised concerns are part of a broader diplomatic messaging, with Indian leaders conveying the issue not only bilaterally but also in various multilateral and foreign interlocutor engagements.
The matter has taken on added weight against the backdrop of recent violence and political tensions in Bangladesh. In parts of that country, reports have circulated of brutal attacks on minority individuals, including a case in which a Hindu man was found burned to death under circumstances that have alarmed observers and been widely reported in Indian news media. At the same time, Dhaka has responded in some quarters by challenging certain narratives emerging from India, including dismissals of some media reports as exaggerated or misleading and official statements reiterating that investigations are underway and that legal processes are being pursued.
Relations between the two neighbours have seen strains over these and related issues, with India urging the Bangladeshi government to take swift and decisive action whenever violence occurs. The emphasis from New Delhi’s side has been on upholding the principles of justice, equality and protection for all citizens, irrespective of religion or community. As of this week’s parliamentary reply, the Indian government’s line remains that it is watching developments closely, regularly raising the issue with Bangladeshi counterparts, and expecting that authorities in Dhaka will fulfil their responsibilities to investigate acts of violence against minorities and ensure accountability.
This stance illustrates both New Delhi’s concern for human rights issues affecting communities in the region and the diplomatic friction that can arise when neighbouring states interpret events and their causes differently. Indian officials insist they are acting on factual reports and civil society data, while Bangladeshi authorities have at times suggested that media narratives may be misleading or that incidents are being mischaracterised. The ongoing exchange points to the broader complexities of bilateral relations, where domestic political contexts, communal tensions, and international expectations intersect, shaping official responses and public perceptions in both capitals.