Case Summary

An anti-Hindu fake news demonising the Hindu community was circulated on social media by Muslim journalists and Congress politicians. This followed the death of a beef smuggler, which was falsely portrayed as a case of a Hindu mob lynching a Muslim man. According to news reports, on 25th August 2024, 22-year-old Monu, son of Wasim, a Muslim resident of Sohalpur Gada, Uttarakhand, drowned after jumping into a pond to escape a cow protection team. The incident occurred when the Gauvansh Sanrakshan Squad, acting on information regarding possible beef smuggling, approached Monu. In an attempt to flee, Monu leapt into the pond and drowned, resulting in his death. The incident quickly became controversial as misinformation spread on social media platforms like Twitter (now X). False narratives circulated that Monu, also identified in some posts as Wasim, had been shot and beaten by police before being thrown into the pond. Other posts accused the police of threatening villagers who tried to help Monu and claimed that they stood guard while he died. These fabrications further extended to false allegations of mob lynching by Hindus. Key figures, including journalist Zakir Ali Tyagi and Congress leader Nazar Faridi, amplified these misleading versions of events. ‘Journalist’ Zakir Ali Tyagi referred to the deceased as 22-year-old gym trainer Wasim, who, according to him, was shot dead and thrown into the pond by police. He further quoted family members, stating that Wasim had been returning home after dinner at his sister’s house in Madhopur, within the Ganganahar Police Station area of Roorkee. He claimed that the Gauvansh Sanrakshan Squad reached there, caught him, and then shot, beat, and threw him into the pond. Tyagi added that the team stood by with guns and warned Wasim that if he came out, he would be shot. When villagers tried to save him, the police allegedly threatened to shoot them and chased them away. Ultimately, the injured Wasim drowned in the pond and died. Meanwhile, Congress leader Nazar Faridi claimed, “Haridwar-Roorkee: Gym trainer Wasim was returning after dinner at his sister’s house. The cow protection squad caught him, shot him, beat him, and threw him into a pond. The team surrounded the pond with guns and threatened to shoot him if he tried to come out. When villagers attempted to save him, the police chased them away with threats of firing. Ultimately, the injured Wasim drowned and died.” Another Muslim social media user named A. Rahmaan spread similar misinformation, writing, “In Madhopur, Roorkee, a young man, Bashir Qureshi alias Monu, was murdered and his body was thrown into a pond. Family members stated that the police were trying to cover up the case.” In response to the widespread misinformation, the Uttarakhand Police issued an official statement warning against the circulation of false content. The police clarified that Monu’s death occurred while he was attempting to evade the Gauvansh Sanrakshan Squad, which was acting on a tip-off regarding beef smuggling. They confirmed that three cases were registered under relevant legal provisions and asserted that strict action was being taken against those responsible for spreading fake news.

Case Images

Why it is Hate Crime ?

This case is being added to the tracker under the primary category- Hate Speech against Hindus. Within this, the subcategory selected is- Anti-Hindu subversion and prejudice. The tertiary category selected is- Anti-Hindu fake news or downplaying. Hate speech is defined as any speech, gesture, conduct, writing, or display that is prejudicial against a specific individual and/or group of people, which is leading to or may lead to violence, prejudicial action or hate against that individual and/or group. Media plays a specific and overarching reach in perpetuating prejudicial attitudes towards a community owing to unfair, untrue coverage and/or misrepresentation/misinterpretation, selective coverage and/or omission of facts of/pertaining to issues affecting a specific religious group. This type of bias can dehumanise the victim group, making it easier for others to justify harmful actions against them, which aligns with the objectives of hate speech laws aimed at preventing such harm. It is often observed that the media takes a prejudicial stand against the Hindu community driven by their need to shield the aggressor community which happens to be a numeric minority, however, is the one perpetrating violence against Hindus. For example, the media is often quick to contextualise religiously motivated crimes against Hindus, omit or misrepresent facts that point towards religiously motivated hate crimes, justify and/or downplay religiously motivated hate crimes or simply present fake news to stereotype Hindus. Such media bias leads to the denial of persecution and is often used to dehumanise Hindus, leading to justification for violence against them. For example, the media covered several fake allegations of Hindus targeting Muslims and forcing them to chant Jai Shree Ram. Most of these cases were proved false and fabricated after police investigation. These fake news reports were subsequently never retracted or clarified. Such fake news led to the justification of violence and dehumanisation of Hindus based on the argument that since Hindus targeted Muslims and forced them to chant Jai Shree Ram, the dehumanisation of Hindus and violence against them was par for the course and merely a retaliation. Such media bias leads to prejudicial portrayal of Hindus and offers a justification for violence against them and therefore, is considered hate speech under this category. This incident was a textbook example of anti-Hindu hate speech. The deliberate fabrication that turned the accidental drowning of a Muslim beef smuggler into a story of Hindu mob lynching was not an error born of confusion but an intentional act meant to vilify an entire community. By portraying Hindus—particularly those involved in lawful cow protection efforts—as violent and intolerant, the propaganda aimed to criminalise their faith and cultural convictions. Such distortion was not merely irresponsible reporting; it was a calculated attempt to inflame communal divisions and malign the Hindu identity by projecting Hindus as extremists rather than as victims of manipulation and prejudice. The scale and speed at which this fake narrative spread on social media deepened resentment towards Hindus. It weaponised misinformation to create outrage and suspicion, pushing false stereotypes of Hindus as oppressors of minorities. This kind of targeted propaganda does not occur in isolation—it thrives on political agendas and ideological bias that systematically demonise Hindu beliefs and traditions. When these narratives take root, they erode social trust and harmony, making it easier for hate-mongers to paint Hindu spiritual and cultural values as threats rather than as guiding principles of peace and co-existence. The real-world consequences of such propaganda are grave and far-reaching. Continuous exposure to anti-Hindu hate speech cultivates an atmosphere of hostility and bias, leading to verbal abuse, workplace discrimination, social exclusion, and even physical violence against Hindus. By imposing collective guilt on an entire community for fabricated incidents, it normalises hatred and justifies prejudice under the false garb of victimhood. This deliberate vilification of Hindus transforms misinformation into a weapon of social division and fuels religious intolerance. Such manipulation of truth amounts to organised hate propaganda and qualifies as an act of anti-Hindu hate speech. In recognition of its severity, this case has been documented in the Hinduphobia Tracker’s hate crime database. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records the dates of incidents based on when the crime occurs rather than when it is reported by the media. In this particular case, the exact dates on which the accused individuals made their social media posts are not specified. Therefore, for documentation purposes, the date of the actual incident—25th August 2024—has been used as the indicative date of occurrence.