On 30 July 2025, Union Home Minister Amit Shah stood in the Rajya Sabha and declared unequivocally: “No Hindu can ever be a terrorist.” He was responding to years of narrative-building that sought to equate terrorism with Hindu symbols, particularly during the UPA regime, which popularised the term “saffron terror.”
Barely 24 hours later, on 31 July 2025, a special court in Mumbai acquitted all seven accused in the 2008 Malegaon blast case, including Sadhvi Pragya and Lt. Col. Prasad Purohit, vindicating Amit Shah’s position with judicial clarity. The accused, branded as terrorists for over 17 years, walked free after the court ruled that the prosecution failed to establish even the basic elements of the charges.
But instead of introspecting on how a deeply flawed prosecution collapsed under its own weight, The News Minute (TNM) editor, Dhanya Rajendran, took to social media with a cryptic, bitter post. She wrote, “Yesterday, Amit Shah in Rajya Sabha: No Hindu can ever be a terrorist.
Today, in court: All Malegaon accused acquitted.”
Why so salty, Dhanya?
Is she implying that the courts took a cue from Amit Shah’s Rajya Sabha speech? That the judiciary, after 17 long years of trial, 323 prosecution witnesses, 10,800 exhibits, and over 1,300 pages of arguments, waited for Shah’s “signal” in Parliament before delivering its judgment?
A 17-Year Trial That Destroyed Lives
The court’s judgment systematically dismantled the “saffron terror” narrative. There is no proof that the motorcycle used in the blast belonged to Sadhvi Pragya, no evidence that she had possession of the vehicle at the time of the incident. There is no credible link between any accused and the actual bomb-making process. There is no proof that the Abhinav Bharat trust collected or used funds for terror.
Sanctions under UAPA were found to be defective and legally untenable.
Sadhvi Pragya, who was brutally tortured in custody, suffered brain swelling, multiple injuries, and eventually cancer. She never confessed to any crime, and the court has now ruled that no crime could be proven. She was vilified as the face of “Hindu terror” – propaganda that many “journalists”, including Dhanya Rajendran, ran with enthusiastically.
Where is the apology for what she went through? Why isn’t the same moral outrage directed at those who tortured her, fabricated evidence, and ran a witch-hunt?
Selective Outrage Much?
Just over a week ago, the Bombay High Court acquitted all the men convicted in the 2006 Mumbai train blasts. Is Dhanya aware of their religion? Does justice only matter when it serves your narrative?
Amit Shah’s statement was not a directive; it was a reflection of lived reality and judicial record. It is now backed by an acquittal in the Malegaon blast case, collapsing prosecution stories from the UPA era, and the complete failure of the “Hindu terror” thesis in court.
Meanwhile, Shah also pointed out in Parliament how the Congress attempted to blame 26/11 on Hindutva groups, even though the perpetrators were Pakistan-based jihadis. Shah named Congress leader Digvijaya Singh for promoting this lie and exposed how a leaked diplomatic cable revealed Congress leaders expressing more concern about “Hindu terror” than Pakistan’s role.
Why is Dhanya Rajendran so upset that innocent people were acquitted? She would have probably preferred that they remain falsely convicted to protect a political narrative – that of her paymasters.
What does that say about her faith in the judiciary – only valid when it aligns with her beliefs?
As Amit Shah said, “No Hindu can ever be a terrorist”, not because Hindus are above the law, but because the legal system has found no evidence to justify that label, even after exhaustive trials.
Justice has been done. The innocents are free.
Will those who manufactured and amplified the “Hindu terror” narrative face their own reckoning in the mirror, if nowhere else?
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.