Give me screen time, I’ll give you fodder for communal debates: Shahabuddin Razvi’s give & take with news channels

by Abhishek Kumar

Of late, ‘Maulana’ Shahabuddin Razvi Bareilvi, who claims to be the president of the All India Muslim Jamaat, has emerged as a favourite of several mainstream media channels, by dint of his consistency in making controversial statements. Keen to establish himself as a representative voice of Muslims, Shahabuddin often makes comments about the community which suit a particular political narrative. These statements are amplified on social media by news agencies, and lapped up by the TRP-hungry TV anchors. Prime-time ‘debates’ are then conducted on those bizarre and controversial topics. Once the uproar about one comment dies down, this cycle repeats itself.

Alt News ran a deep-dive investigation tracking Razvi’s comments and uncovered a pattern in how news channels used his statements to manufacture news, drive news cycles and spur communal debates. The chronology is as follows:

  1. Initial contact: News agencies cover Shahabuddin Razvi Bareilvi’s controversial remarks. This makes it a topic of discussion.
  2. Sensationalization through tweets: News agencies then tweet Bareilvi’s statement to ensure it gets circulated quickly. This leads to social media users resharing and reacting to it.
  3. Reaction by politicians: News agencies approach religious leaders and members of various political parties to cover their reactions to Bareilvi’s statement and further sensationalize the issue.
  4. Syndicated feed gets used by media outlets: The statement is then distributed to syndicated media partners, further increasing its reach across various platforms. This makes it a trending topic of discussion and guarantees wide circulation.
  5. Prime-time programmes/debates: The remarks become a hot topic in prime-time TV debates/programmes, where news channels invite so-called religious experts and politicians to discuss Bareilvi’s comments. This often fuels further polarization.

Once, the debates and ‘news’ cycles born out of contentious remarks by the self-proclaimed ‘Maulana’ acquire a life of their own, they shape newer narratives around the Muslim community, often presenting them in a poor light. The media, as readers can see, plays a key role in this process of creating public opinion through sensational and communally charged stories.

Here are a few cases in example from the several instances that Alt News tracked:  

Case 1: Maha Kumbh Held on Waqf Land 

In a controversial statement to the media, Shahabuddin Razvi Bareilvi claimed that the Maha Kumbh, a religious festival and gathering of Hindus in Prayagraj, was being held on Waqf land. The media amplified Shahabuddin’s statement by tweeting it. The claim sparked a lot of debate and reactions on social media, with many people generalising Muslims and criticising an alleged divisive ploy behind of Shahabuddin’s statement.

News agency ANI then sought reactions from various religious Hindutva outfit leaders and politicians, including VHP spokesperson Vinod Bansal, Durga Vahini chief Sadhvi Ritambara, BJP MP Giriraj Singh, Hindu religious leader Rambhadracharya. Their reactions fueled further debates, and the media used these leaders’ comments to disseminate Shahabuddin Razvi Bareilvi’s narrative. The media’s role in this entire news cycle was crucial, that of a catalyst and amplifier.

Eventually, the topic reached prime-time bulletins leading media channels where absurd communal debates are the order of the day. Some of the big names among them included the state-run DD News, Zee News, News18, Times Now, and India Today. 

Case 2: Cricketer Mohammed Shami Sipping Energy Drink 

In another statement to a media outlet, Shahabuddin Razvi Bareilvi called cricketer Mohammed Shami a ‘criminal’ for consuming an energy drink during a match during the month of Ramzan. The comment attracted a lot of attention when the agency tweeted it, following which social media was flooded with reactions. Many people shared their views on social media and criticised it, including several Islamic scholars who termed Shahabuddin’s statement absurd.

The media agency also sought reactions from various religious leaders and politicians, including UP minister Danish Azad Ansari, Deobandi cleric Maulana Qari Ishaque Gora, BJP leader Chalavadi Narayanaswamy, BJP leader R Ashok, JDS MLC SL Bhojegowda, Karnataka Congress MLA Sharath Bachegowda, Congress MLA Rizwan Arshad, and Jama Masjid Imam Shahban Bukhari. These reactions contributed significantly to the ongoing debate. Once again, the media played a key role in amplifying Razvi’s comments.

As expected, the issue was widely covered by various media outlets through the news agency’s syndicated feed, increasing its reach. As the controversy gained momentum, it eventually made it to TV shows, where media coverage turned one person’s comments into a larger social issue. Two anchors from the news channel Times Now, Pratibha and Navika Kumar, mentioned Shahabuddin’s absurd statement in separate programmes. Two anchors from News24 also aired Shahabuddin’s statement in two separate TV programs. IBC24 also published a special report on Shahabuddin’s statement. News18 followed up with a program on Shahabuddin’s subsequent comment on the issue within a few days. 

Case 3: Controversy over Salman Khan’s Ram Janmabhoomi Edition watch

Bareilvi, in another controversial comment to a news agency, criticised Bollywood actor Salman Khan for wearing a Ram Janmabhoomi Edition watch and called it ‘haram’ and un-Islamic. This comment, like his earlier statements, was amplified by the agency on X (Twitter), which led to a public reaction.

Like in the earlier instances, the news agency then sought comments from politicians like Uttar Pradesh minister Danish Azad Ansari and Jaiveer Singh on Shahabuddin Razvi Bareilvi’s statement on Salman Khan, manufacturing a communal debate.

As this piece of ‘news’ acquired a life of its own on social media and started getting viral, it helped create a public perception of Muslims in general as fanatics who are against individual expression.

Eventually, this matter, too, found coverage in prime-time TV programs, in which channels like News18, India Today, and News Nation played an important role in turning the remarks of a person known for controversial opinions into a wider social debate. News18 went a step further. They not only ran programs on it through Hindi channel News18 India, English channel CNN News18, News18 MP-Chhattisgarh, News18 UP Uttarakhand, News18 Bihar Jharkhand, and many other units, but also sought the reaction of everyday Muslims, as well as organising TV debates featuring politicians.

Case 4: Mohammed Shami’s Daughter Playing Holi

In another controversial statement reported by news agency PTI, Shahabuddin Razvi called the celebration of Holi by Indian bowler Mohammed Shami’s daughter ‘illegal’ and ‘against Sharia law’.

News agencies IANS and ANI recorded reactions on it from Madhya Pradesh minister Vishwas Sarang.

Following this, Shahabuddin’s controversial statement was aired on various media outlets through PTI’s syndicate feed. And as usual, this statement eventually found space in the prime-time programmes of major news outlets including Aaj Tak, Times Now Navbhart, Republic Bharat, India Today, CNN News18, Zee News, ABP Ganga, NDTV, and Bharat 24. Times Now sensationalized it more than any other channel with at least three of its anchors, Swati, Pratibha and Priya Bahal conducting separate programmes on this issue.

Flurry of Fatwas

There are many other instances in which Shahabuddin Razvi Bareilvi has made bizarre statements and issued fatwas (a formal ruling or interpretation on a point of Islamic law given by a qualified legal scholar known as a mufti) that have not only fueled communal debates, but also contributed to a stereotyped portrayal of Islam and freedom of expression under it. These incidents again show how the media gives screen space to the self-proclaimed Maulana, amplifies such statements, and thereby generates a news cycle based on reactions from prominent figures. Here are some examples of fatwas that have influenced the public perception of this community.

In a statement to the media, Shahabuddin Razvi Bareilvi issued a fatwa against Muslims celebrating New Year on January 1, saying that it was for Christians and it was strictly forbidden for Muslims to observe any un-Islamic ritual.

Issuing another fatwa for Muslim women, Shahabuddin Razvi Bareilvi told the media that after marrying non-Muslim men, they should not wear sindoor, kalawa and bindi as these were against the principles of Islam.

He also issued a fatwa against SP MLA Naseem Solanki for worshipping in a Shiva temple and lighting diyas during Diwali, saying that idol worship was considered haram in Islam. Apart from this, he advised Solanki that if he had done so unknowingly, he was guilty in the eyes of Shariat and should undergo repentance, adding that strict rules applied to those who knowingly engaged in such worship.

Note that all these statements were covered by news agencies.

Social media also plays a key role in orchestrating news cycles around these statements. News agencies use X or Twitter to amplify Shahabuddin’s statements quickly, ensuring that they reached a large section of the audience. The tweets serve as the initial spark, generating reactions and reshares from social media users, which then turn into a full-blown blaze through syndicated feeds of various media platforms and prime-time programmes/debates.

Muslim Religious Leaders Reject Razvi’s Comments

During a press conference, Ittehad-e-Millat Council chief Maulana Tauqeer Raza remarked in March 2025 that Shahabuddin, who hailed from Bahraich, falsely described himself as a Bareilvi ulema. Raza said that Shahabuddin had no connection with Bareilly Markaz and accused him of trying to tarnish the reputation of Bareilly. He also accused the ‘Maulana’ of dragging Shariat into every big or small issue, adding that he should refrain from making statements that fueled unnecessary controversy. In response to Shahabuddin’s comments on Salman Khan’s Ram Mandir watch, Maulana Tauqeer Raza said that it was nit right to link such matters to Sharia and unnecessarily create controversies.

Speaking to Alt News, S M Yasin, joint secretary of Anjuman Intezamia Masjid committee, which manages the Gyanvapi Mosque, said that Razvi had no connection with Bareilly, yet wrote his name as Bareilvi (from Bareilly). He added, “He has nothing to do with the dargah of Bareilly. He is a very controversial man. He said that the Maha Kumbh which was happening recently, was on Waqf land, which I responded to, saying it was false. Similarly, he keeps giving some or the other statement every day which becomes news.”

Building Pro-BJP Narratives

Critics of Maulana Shahabuddin Razvi Bareilvi point to numerous instances in which Razvi’s comments, often interpreted as attempting to delegitimize dissenting voices, help bolster pro-BJP narratives, directly or indirectly. 

Speaking about Bareilvi, Shaukat Ali, the Uttar Pradesh president of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen, pointed out that Razvi’s comments often benefitted the BJP. Ali stated, “He works at the behest of the BJP, that is why he keeps making absurd statements every day. The BJP gets an opportunity to defame the image of Islam and Muslims, and the party easily succeeds in creating a Hindu-Muslim divide. In this way, the BJP gets benefited during the elections. Shahabuddin Razvi is not a resident of Bareilly, he was expelled from Dargah Aala Hazrat because of these absurd statements. He has also written letters to Yogi Adityanath several times requesting that he is made a member of the state Madrasa Board.”

In some instances, Razvi has openly supported the agenda of the BJP government. Before the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, Shahabuddin Razvi had appealed to the Muslims of India not to oppose Narendra Modi in the Lok Sabha elections.

He told Muslims that it was not the time to go for a clash with Narendra Modi, and urged them to extend a hand of friendship as he (Modi) wanted to ‘connect’ with Muslims.

He also issued a statement in September 2024 on the Waqf (Amendment) Bill opposed by Muslims across the country and said that if the Bill was passed in the upcoming session, Muslims would welcome it. Not only this, Maulana Shahabuddin spoke against the appeal made by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board to all Muslims to wear a black band on Jumu’atul-Wida in protest against the Waqf (Amendment) Bill in March 2025, and told Muslims not to do so.

He also commented on the results of by-elections held in Uttar Pradesh and elections held in Maharashtra, saying, Indian Muslims liked Prime Minister Narendra Modi, which is why they had openly supported the BJP in the polls.

Welcoming the notification of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), he had said that protests against this legislation from previous years occurred due to the misinformation spread by political entities among Muslims. He added that every Muslim of India should welcome the CAA. It is worth noting that nationwide protests were held by Muslims and civil society organizations against this law.

Commenting on the distribution of ‘Saugat-e-Modi’ kits on Eid, Shahabuddin praised the Prime Minister and said that his aim was to develop positive relations with the Muslim community.

While giving a statement on Jammu and Kashmir elections, he promoted the agenda of the BJP and praised Narendra Modi and Yogi Adityanath, saying that both these personalities were capable of fulfilling the dream of an ‘Akhand Bharat’.

Taken together, it is clear that Shahabuddin Razvi Bareilvi and his statements are a good example of how ‘news’ and communal debates are manufactured by the Indian media. When his controversial statements are amplified and a news cycle is generated, it not only leads to polarization in society, but often portrays the Muslim community in a negative light, and plays a role in shaping people’s perception of the community overall. It surely points to a nexus between him and these news outlets.

However, Razvi’s bizarre statements, which often align with the ruling party’s agenda, also raise questions about the motives behind his self-aggrandizement. Is he merely a part of a news manufacturing business run by media companies, or is he being used as a tool with political purposes? If at the end of the day, his remarks almost always benefit the ruling dispensation, one can’t help wondering how deep the nexus runs.  

Alt News Spoke to the ‘Maulana’

Alt News spoke to ‘Maulana’ Shahabuddin over phone. Here are a few excerpts from the conversation:

Question: Your statements are constantly making headlines in the media. Does the media approach you or do you inform the media that you want to issue a statement?

Answer: There are many issues on which I have my own viewpoint which I want to present, so I record the statement myself and send it to the media, or in some cases I call up media persons. Sometimes it also happens that on many issues, people from the media come to me and ask for my views and reactions, which I then respond to. I present my views on whatever I feel is right and in the interest of my society and country.

Question: In many cases, a pattern has been observed that when the media obtains a statement from you on an issue, it also approaches different leaders to get their reactions on your statement, and your statement is coloured in such a way that it appears as the view of the entire Muslim community.

Answer: These are the responsibilities, likes and dislikes of these people. I cannot stop anyone. People are free, and every person has the right to state their opinion as per their wish. Whatever the media persons do is their choice, I cannot say anything to them.

Question: Don’t you think you are being used as a medium, where the reactions of others are sought on your statement and it is then converted into a controversy so the topic can become a prime-time debate? For example, when you issued a statement on Salman Khan’s Ram Mandir edition watch, the media sought the reactions of different people on it…

Answer: Getting statements and reactions is the media’s job, its responsibility. They fulfill their responsibility, and everyone should fulfill their responsibility. I do not compromise with anyone in the matter of Shariat, whether someone is powerful or not, even if it is myself. If someone questions me on it, I will answer. Shariat is not dependent on whether someone is powerful or not. Kings and rickshaw drivers are equal before it. I do not compromise with anyone when it comes to the matter of Shariat. I will say whatever I feel is right and true openly.

Question: In your statements that get covered by the media, you have issued multiple appeals to support Narendra Modi. Even during the Lok Sabha elections, you said that Muslims should not oppose Narendra Modi. Many people keep accusing you regarding this, like AIMIM Uttar Pradesh chief Shaukat Ali, who stated that you worked at the behest of the BJP and you wanted to become a member of the Madrasa Board. Apart from this, he also alleged that you are not a resident of Bareilly.

Answer: I have also opposed the BJP, Mr. Yogi and Mr. Modi on many occasions. I affirm that since my birth, I have been living in Bareilly, and it has been some 40 years. No person can prove that I have ever appealed to the people to support the BJP. May Allah curse those who lie. It is very easy to accuse others, but when proof is demanded, people start looking here and there. I hope Allah gives them wisdom and understanding and brings them salvation.

Question: S M Yasin of the Gyanvapi Mosque stated that your remarks create controversy and they ae meant for making headlines. For example, you spoke about the Kumbh Mela being held on Waqf land.

Answer: The Kumbh Mela was being held on thousands of bighas of land, out of which 55 bighas of land is Waqf land. The context behind that statement was that when the Akhada Parishad had announced that shops belonging Muslims would not be set up there. I had responded that while Muslims were showing their big hearts and generosity, members of the Akhada Parishad were demonstrating lack thereof. They should have also shown their generosity. The area which forms part of the 55 bighas of Waqf land in the Kumbh Mela is called Jhunsi. There is a Sufi scholar there, a dargah, and a tomb which has a Waqf in its name, and 189 is its Waqf number. I had said this then, and even today I stand by my statement.

Question: There are many statements of yours which are used to paint all Muslims in the same colour. While your statements are your personal opinion, the media presents them in a way that suggests that those are the opinions of all Muslims in general. What do you have to say about such geenralization?

Answer: Shariat has its own rules. If any Muslim, young or old, speaks against Shariat, works against it, or breaks its rules, he will be punished. It is my responsibility to warn him, tell him that he has done something that violates the Shariat. I did the same with Mr. Shami who, in the month of Ramzan in broad daylight, drank a cold drink in front of thousands of people on the cricket ground. Fasting is compulsory, it has an important place in Islam. First, he did not fast. Then, despite being in front of everyone, whether it was a need or a compulsion, Mr. Shami drank the cold drink in broad daylight. This was an insult to fasting, so I spoke out on that issue. I did not say anything about his marital affairs, that he was on the verge of divorce from his wife, or what he eats at home. Neither did I comment on what he wears, be that underwear or a half-shirt, or suggest that he does not read Namaz. I did not say anything else about what he practices, I only spoke on the issue of Shariat. I am a religious leader, a scholar, and it is my responsibility to stop a Muslim from going down the wrong path. No one should feel bad about this. Similarly, Salman Khan and Mr. Shami being public figures does not mean they do not come under the purview of Shariat. In Shariat, there is no one big or small, its order applies equally to everyone. If anyone acts against Shariat, they will be caught, and informing them is my responsibility.

Question: Religion is a personal matter, including how one prays and connects with Allah. The way your statement was aired in the media, don’t you think it constitutes an attack on someone’s personal freedom, because the relationship between God and an individual is personal? This relationship is considered very pure or sacred. The way your statement was peddled in the media to create a public debate out of this, was it not an attempt to publicly embarrass him?

Answer: What can I do to the media within my rights? I cannot do anything, I cannot tie the hands and feet of the media. I do not have any such authority. All I can do is that if someone asks me about an issue, I will tell them, as this is my responsibility. I studied in a Madrasa for 12 years for this very reason. If I had not studied in a Madrasa for 12 years, I would have worn pants and a shirt and I would have gone somewhere to start a business or do a job, and my responsibility would have ended. Allah has made me aalim-e-deen, so I will keep talking about these issues. You can object as much as you want or do whatever you want, write against me or write in my support, I do not care. I will keep talking about Shariat, this is my responsibility.

Donate to Alt News!
Independent journalism that speaks truth to power and is free of corporate and political control is possible only when people start contributing towards the same. Please consider donating towards this endeavour to fight fake news and misinformation.

Donate Now

About the Author

Abhishek is a senior fact-checking journalist and researcher at Alt News. He has a keen interest in information verification and technology. He is always eager to learn new skills, explore new OSINT tools and techniques. Prior to joining Alt News, he worked in the field of content development and analysis with a major focus on Search Engine Optimization (SEO).