Islamic terror org threatens to bomb Ujjain's Mahakaleshwar temple and railway stations
Rajasthan, India 
30 September, 2024
Case Summary
On October 1, 2024, the superintendent of the Hanumangarh railway station in Rajasthan received a threatening letter warning of bomb explosions at several locations. The targets mentioned include Ujjain's Mahakal Temple and various railway stations in Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, with dates for the bombings set for October 30 and November 2. The sender identified himself as Mohammad Saleem and claimed to be an area commander of the terrorist organisation Jaish-e-Mohammed. The letter stated that they would avenge the deaths of their militants killed in Jammu and Kashmir. The letter was sent from the Hanumangarh post office and contained some text written in Punjabi. At the end of the letter, "Khuda Hafiz" (God protect) was written, and according to a railway employee, the letter also contained slogans in support of Jaish-e-Mohammed and Pakistan. An FIR was registered in this matter
Why it is Hate Crime ?
According to details, this case has been added under two prime categories of the hate tracker. The first is- Hate speech against Hindus and within this, the sub-category selected is- Violent threats. Violent threats, explicit, implicit or implied, are the most dangerous form of hate speech since it goes beyond discriminatory and prejudicial language to express the intent of causing harm to an individual or a group of people based on their religious identity and faith. There could be several different kinds of threats that are issued to Hindus based on religious animosity. An explicit threat would mean the direct threat of violence towards an individual Hindu, a group of Hindus or Hindus at large. Physical violence, death threats, threats of destruction of property belonging to Hindus and threats of genocide would mean explicit threats against Hindus for their religious identity. Implicit threats may not be a direct threat but implied through the use of symbols of actions – for example – in the Nupur Sharma case, other than explicit threats, there were also implicit threats when Islamists took to the streets to burn and beat her effigies. It implies that they want to do the same to Nupur Sharma – thereby is considered an implicit threat. Violent threats can be delivered in person, through letters, phone calls, graffiti, or increasingly through social media and other online platforms. It would be important to understand that a threat – explicit or implicit, online or offline – to an individual who happens to be a Hindu does not qualify as a religiously motivated threat. Such a threat, while vile and dangerous, could be owing to non-religious reasons and/or personal animosity. To qualify as a religiously motivated threat, it would need to exhibit an indication that the individual is being targeted for religious reasons and/or owing to his/her religious identity as a Hindu. The letter indicated intentions of a planned terror attack, with specific dates and locations, suggesting premeditated violence aimed at inducing fear among the Hindu community. This confluence of hate speech and the planned act of terrorism underscores the religious animosity driving the threat, situating it within the broader context of religiously motivated hate crimes.
Case Status
Complaint registered
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
N/A
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
