Hindus denigrated as ‘kafirs’, sacred deities abused by Muslim advocate in Raipur, Chhattisgarh
Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India 
13 March, 2026
Case Summary
In the Rajatalab area of Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Hindu religious sentiments were insulted after a Muslim advocate named Anjum Khan posted derogatory remarks about Hinduism and Hindu deities on social media, while sharing greetings for Ramadan. He also labelled Hindus as kafirs, mocking their method of worship. According to reports, the accused, Anjum Khan, posted a status on his social media where he mocked Hindu modes of worship and referred to Hindus as “kafirs,” writing that Hindus did not know anything about prayer and insulted their religious beliefs. He also made derogatory remarks against Hindu deities while simultaneously sharing greetings for Ramadan. The post quickly spread on social media and provoked anger among local residents and Hindu organisations. After noticing the post on 14 March 2026, a Hindu activist named Tulesh Yadav objected to the remarks and mobilised members of his organisation. The following day, activists gathered outside the Civil Lines police station and raised slogans demanding strict legal action against the advocate for insulting Hindu deities and hurting the religious sentiments of Hindus. Protesters stated that the remarks had been made deliberately to provoke communal discord and disrespect Hindu faith. Following the complaint, the police registered an FIR against Anjum Khan under charges related to inciting religious sentiments and disturbing communal harmony. Security measures were strengthened in the Civil Lines and Rajatalab areas after reports emerged of activists gathering at the police station, and additional police patrols were deployed to prevent any escalation of tensions. Police also intensified efforts to locate the accused after the FIR was filed.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category- Hate Speech against Hindus. The subcategory selected is- Anti-Hindu slurs, mocking faith. Anti-Hindu slurs and the deliberate mocking of the Hindu faith owing to religious animosity involve the usage of derogatory terms, stereotypes, or offensive references to religious practices, symbols, or figures. One of the common anti-Hindu slurs used against Hindus is “cow-worshipper” and “cow piss drinker”. The intention of using this term is to demean and mock Hindus as a group and their religious beliefs since Hindus consider the cow holy. Additionally, some symbols and the slurs attached to them have a historical context that exacerbates the insult, hate, stereotyping, dehumanisation and oppression against Hindus. Cow worship has been used for centuries to denigrate Hindus, insult their faith and oppress Hindus specifically as a religious group. There has been overwhelming documentation about how cow slaughter has been used to persecute Hindus with cow meat being thrown in temples and places of worship. There has also been overwhelming documentation where cow meat (beef) has been force-fed to Hindus to either forcefully convert them to Islam or denigrate their faith. Apart from cow worship, the Swastika – which holds deep religious significance for the Hindus – has also been misinterpreted and distorted to use as a slur against Hindus. Similarly, the worship of the Shivling has been used by supremacist ideologies and religions to denigrate Hindus owing to religious animosity. Such slurs and denigration stem out of inherent animosity and hate towards Hindus and their faith, therefore, it is categorised as hate speech targeted at Hindus specifically owing to their religious identity. This case has been added to the tracker because a Muslim advocate publicly made derogatory remarks against Hindu dharma and Hindu religious traditions while sharing greetings for the Islamic holy month of Ramadan on social media. In his post, the accused simultaneously extended Ramadan greetings to Muslims while mocking Hindu modes of worship and insulting Hindu deities. By doing so, he juxtaposed the celebration of Islamic religious identity with the denigration of Hindu faith, creating a divisive narrative that asserted Islamic religious identity while denigrating Hindu identity. It was a deliberate attempt to demean Hinduism and elevate one religious identity by portraying Hindu beliefs as inferior. Such conduct reflects clear hostility towards Hindu religious traditions and symbols and demonstrates a conscious attempt to provoke and offend the religious sentiments of Hindus. Furthermore, the accused also made derogatory statements against Hindu deities. For Hindus, their deities stand central to the religion and command profound reverence. Any attempt to mock or abuse them reflects outright religious animosity towards Hinduism. In this case, the derogatory speech against Hindu deities mounted a direct assault on the sanctity of the Hindu faith. This stood not as a spontaneous or misguided act, but as a calculated and premeditated effort to denigrate Hinduism and the wider Hindu community. The accused also mocked Hindu modes/methods of worship and dismissed Hindu religious practices as meaningless, stating that Hindus did not understand prayer and referring to them as “kafirs,” a term that translates to infidels or non-believers in Islamic terminology. Hindu modes of worship, rituals, and prayers form an essential part of the religious life of millions of Hindus and are regarded with deep reverence and devotion. Ridiculing these sacred practices while attaching the label “kafir” to the followers of the religion amounts to direct religious denigration and dehumanisation. In many contexts, the term “kafir” has historically been used as a derogatory slur to mark non-Muslims as religiously inferior, and its usage in this context demonstrated clear contempt for Hindus and their faith. By stating that Hindus “do not know anything about prayer,” the accused attempted to ridicule and delegitimise Hindu forms of devotion and spiritual practice, dismissing centuries-old religious traditions followed by millions of adherents. Such remarks were not mere criticism of religious practices but constituted demeaning rhetoric intended to portray Hindu worship as inferior or meaningless. Employing this term in conjunction with insults against Hindu worship reflected deep-rooted animosity towards Hindus and their religious identity. This type of language functions as hate speech because it dehumanises a religious community and portrays its members as inherently lesser due to their beliefs. Such actions are not isolated instances; rather, they belong to a persistent pattern aimed at disrespecting the Hindu faith, propelled by entrenched hostility and contempt for Hindus and their beliefs. Acts of this nature qualify as hate speech because they extend far beyond legitimate criticism or debate, seeking instead to demean a religious group and its sacred symbols. The abuse and denigration of Hindu deities arose from deep-rooted religious animosity towards Hindus and their faith, making it a religiously motivated offence. Taken together, the derogatory remarks against Hindu modes of worship, the communal slur directed at Hindus, and the simultaneous glorification of a religious festival of another faith demonstrated a deliberate attempt to demean Hindu religious identity in a public space. The post did not constitute a neutral or theological discussion but instead amounted to targeted hostility against Hinduism and its followers. Such actions contributed to the spread of anti-Hindu hate speech and religious polarisation, making the incident a clear case of religiously motivated hostility directed at Hindus and their faith. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records incidents based on when an event occurred or when the victim's ordeal began. It is important to clarify that none of the media sources covering this case has specified the exact date when the accused made these comments. Since the incident came to light on 14 March 2026, for documentation purposes, we have recorded the date of the incident as 14 March 2026.
Case Status
Complaint registered
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
