Muslim Heritage Under Siege: Hindu Nationalists Call for Demolition of Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb’s Tomb

Sectarian violence erupted in the city of Nagpur as Hindu nationalist groups launched a protest demanding the demolition of the tomb of Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb, a Muslim ruler from the 17th century. 

The unrest quickly escalated into violent clashes between Hindus and Muslims, forcing authorities to impose an indefinite curfew. At least 34 police officers and several civilians have been injured, while dozens have been arrested. 

The demand to remove Aurangzeb’s tomb is the latest in a series of efforts by Hindu nationalist groups to erase Islamic heritage from India. The protest, led by the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal, saw demonstrators burning an effigy of Aurangzeb while chanting slogans calling for the tomb’s demolition. 

The violence intensified when rumors spread that religious scriptures, including a chadar (cloth with holy inscriptions), were desecrated during the protests. Muslim residents, already observing Ramadan, staged a counter-protest, which led to a violent crackdown by police, resulting in numerous arrests—mostly of Muslims. 

Aurangzeb, who ruled India from 1658 to 1707, is a controversial historical figure. While Hindu nationalists portray him as an anti-Hindu oppressor, historians argue that his legacy is far more complex. 

According to Audrey Truschke, historian and author of Aurangzeb: The Man and the Myth, “Aurangzeb was a very complicated king with many sides to him. Whenever piety and power conflicted, he chose power—every single time.” 

Despite this nuanced historical perspective, Hindu nationalist rhetoric has weaponized Aurangzeb’s name to justify aggressive campaigns against Muslim heritage sites. 

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has repeatedly invoked Aurangzeb in speeches, portraying him as a tyrant who targeted Hindus. 

During a speech in 2022, Modi declared, “Aurangzeb’s atrocities, his terror… He tried to crush culture with fanaticism.” Such remarks have fueled hostility toward India’s Muslim minority, who have faced increasing violence and discrimination since Modi took office in 2014. 

The recent release of the Bollywood film Chhaava, which dramatizes the battles between Aurangzeb and the Hindu Maratha rulers, has further inflamed tensions. Maharashtra’s Chief Minister, Devendra Fadnavis, acknowledged this connection, stating that the film had “brought the public anger against Aurangzeb to the fore.” 

VHP spokesperson Amit Bajpai defended the protests, saying, “That grave is a black spot in our homeland. It is our democratic right to demand for what we feel right.” However, residents in Nagpur, both Hindu and Muslim, have expressed fear over the escalating violence. 

“There is no trust or faith in each other,” said Datta Shirke, a Hindu resident. On the other side, a Muslim resident named Aslam lamented, “I have done nothing. But when police come, their eyes seek our blood.” 

The demand to remove Aurangzeb’s tomb is not an isolated incident. Hindu nationalist groups have aggressively targeted Muslim places of worship, laying claim to several mosques across India. Many such cases, including the Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi, are currently being fought in court. 

The most infamous case remains the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992 by Hindu extremists, which led to nationwide riots. In January 2024, Modi’s government fulfilled a long-standing demand of Hindu nationalists by inaugurating a temple on the disputed site in Ayodhya. 

Encouraged by such victories, Hindu nationalist groups are now pressing for further demolitions. 

For historian Truschke, the Hindu nationalist obsession with Aurangzeb is not just about history—it is a tool to fuel anti-Muslim sentiment. 

“Knowing history is critical to understanding how communities and nations have been shaped,” she said. “But litigating for what may have happened in the 17th century is an insane idea.” 

As India approaches its next national elections, the use of religious sentiment for political gain continues to endanger the country’s secular foundation. Whether authorities will uphold justice or allow majoritarian forces to dictate history remains an open question.