A legal arrest of Delhi Police has now become a cause of a major cultural dispute. This case is no longer limited to the illegal presence of only one foreign national, but now it has become a political dispute about identity and language.
During the investigation of the FIR, the police mentioned the “Bangladeshi language” in an internal note, while there is no such language. The official language of Bangladesh is ‘Bangla’, which is also spoken in West Bengal, Tripura and parts of Assam in India.
This language mistake has now become a new issue in West Bengal politics. The Trinamool Congress (TMC) described it as ‘cultural insensitivity’ and accused the institutions under the central government that they associate the ‘Bangla’ language with foreign identity. The Chief Minister wrote on X (Twitter) that see how Delhi Police is describing Bangla as ‘Bangladeshi’ language under the Ministry of Home Affairs.
What was the FIR case?
On 11 March 2025, Delhi Police arrested a 27-year-old Bangladeshi citizen named Mohammad Jewel Islam from Bhogal-Jangpura area of South Delhi. According to the FIR, he entered India from Cooch Behar border in West Bengal in 2021, he did not have a valid passport or visa.
In Delhi, he was living with Aadhaar card and PAN card, which he allegedly made with fake documents. During interrogation, he also presented the National ID of Bangladesh and the identity card of his mother and brother.
The case against him was legally strong. It imposed sections of the Indian Code, Foreigners Act and Aadhaar Act. More 7 people were arrested in the investigation, who are accused of living in India with fake documents.
Why did the language dispute arise?
The matter came into controversy when the word “Bangladeshi language” was used in the internal letter of the police. It was not in the FIR, but a part associated with a latter translation process. But now this issue has jumped politically.
Filmmakers, musicians and people of the Bengali community have described it as not only the fault of words, but a lack of cultural understanding. They believe that administrative institutions are making language and dialect a measure of identity.
West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee posted the government on this issue while posting on social media platform X. He wrote, Bangla language speaks crores of Indians. Which is also recognized by the Constitution of India. But now see how the Delhi Police, which is under the central government, is describing the ‘Bangla’ language as Bangladeshi.
Can the dialect decide citizenship?
Many Bengali language dialects are spoken in India and Bangladesh, such as:
- Kolkata standard Bangla
- Jalpaiguri/Rajbanshi
- Silhati (spoken in Barak Valley of Assam)
- Chitgaon, Noakhali, Barisal, Faridpur etc.
Many of these dialects are similar to the borders of India and Bangladesh. In such a situation, it is wrong to decide his nationality with someone’s dialect. The real identity should be decided by his document.
Delhi Police’s silence and BJP’s response
So far, Delhi Police has not given any clarification on this language mistake. TMC attacked this silence, while the BJP justified it. BJP leader Amit Malviya said that the Delhi Police was calling the language ‘Bangladeshi’ in the context of the identity of the intruder.
Sushmita Dev of TMC replied that there are millions of Indian citizens who have been living in Assam, who have been living in Barak Valley of Assam for generations. Gaurav Gogoi of Congress also attacked the BJP and said that it is an insult to millions of Bengali speakers.
Was it just a mistake?
This dispute is not just a language mistake, but a reflection of the thinking which is present in the administrative agencies regarding migrants and languages. In today’s India, language has become a symbol of identity, politics and emotion, not just the means of dialogue.
Therefore, such a mistake is not only considered administrative lapse, but a big social and political sign. As long as the institutions do not understand the linguistic diversity of India properly, the attempt to protect the law will also be seen as bias.
—- End —-