The Mongol Khans of Medieval France

These foreign invaders did do great harm to India as their intention in invading us was to only exploit India's wealth, weaken us and make their own kingdom richer.

But indian muslim rulers, who sought to create their own independent kingdoms in India, after conquering them, did not send India's wealth anywhere. They used it to develop their own kingdom's (i.e. India's) economy and growth. The Mughal empire is the perfect example of this, as they made India one of the richest country in the world during their period (which is what attracted the Europeans to colonise our country, and loot it).

As rulers of their own kingdom, muslim kings or emperors had no interest in creating famines in their own kingdoms. Indeed, Famines in India - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine_in_India outlines that famines have been documented in India even during the Maurya rule (2000+ years ago), (which is why you find Kautilya writing about famine relief), and gives examples of many famine reliefs documented in Indian history, even amongst Indian kingdom with muslim rulers. Note that I am not denying that famines happened in indian kingdoms with muslim rulers. It was however not common practice to artificially create to target a particular any community. As with any Hindu or Buddhist kingdoms in India, some were just natural disasters (because of flooding or drought) or due to flawed policies (like taxation) by despotic or inexperienced kings and a few may have been possible acts of warfare against an enemy kingdom.

As I wrote elsewhere here, if one is not obsessed with religious identity of a ruler, one will find that they are all the same everywhere - some or good and some are average and some are just weak despots. Their religious identity had nothing to do with why their kingdom was great or weak*.