As the “I Love Muhammad” campaign, triggered after FIRs were registered against people for holding the banner in Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat and Maharashtra, spread across the country, a social media influencer in Gujarat, whose Facebook post holding it drew police summons, claimed he was assaulted in custody.
This led to a gathering of his followers in Godhra police station, which ended with police excess on them and their parading on the street with tied legs as public shaming, amounting to human rights violations, yet no action was taken against the police despite the Supreme Court direction against the public shaming of the accused.
The protests that erupted in Godhra followed a larger national movement where the simple declaration of devotion became a rallying cry for sections of the Muslim community, with youths and clerics condemning the police response in various states, while rights groups expressed concern that freedom of religious expression was being curtailed.
Tensions escalated after the police detained 17 men in Godhra, registering cases against more than 80 others for allegedly vandalising the police station, although criticism centred on the manner in which detainees, injured and roped, were paraded publicly in what was perceived as an orchestrated humiliation.
The controversy was rooted in the Kanpur incident, where police registered FIRs against several young men carrying placards bearing the phrase “I Love Muhammad” during Milad-un-Nabi processions, which triggered outrage among religious leaders, rights organisations, and community members who argued that such actions criminalised expressions of faith.
In Mumbai too, police took down banners with the same phrase, citing the risk of communal unrest, and this reinforced fears that state institutions were interpreting displays of devotion as potential provocations, thereby undermining constitutional rights.
In Bareilly, the campaign gained momentum after clerics urged families to place posters on their homes, which was followed by peaceful demonstrations outside mosques, where participants demanded that cases registered against Kanpur youths be withdrawn and that the government acknowledge their right to religious expression.
Local scholars and religious organisations described the campaign as an affirmation of faith rather than a confrontation, insisting that the community had never objected to symbols or celebrations of other faiths and should not be penalised for expressing reverence for the Prophet.
The movement soon spread to social media, with people changing display pictures and sharing banners online, while rallies and gatherings in Mumbai, Bareilly, and other cities highlighted the scale of participation, despite intermittent police interventions. Observers noted that the symbolism of the campaign carried emotional weight, as it was framed both as a defence of religious devotion and as a protest against what was perceived as arbitrary state action.
Amid this backdrop, the Godhra incident became a flashpoint because of the visual impact of detainees being paraded, which rights activists described as a breach of human dignity, even as police defended their actions, citing allegations of vandalism and arson.
The handling of detainees drew widespread condemnation across social and digital platforms, as activists argued that the treatment constituted a violation of human rights norms and international obligations, and that the state must not use public humiliation as a deterrent.