Hindu residents of Roorkee face murder and beheading threats from Muslim man on social media
Roorkee, Uttarakhand, India 
13 March, 2026
Case Summary
In Roorkee city, located in the Haridwar district of Uttarakhand, the Hindu community received murder and beheading threats from a Muslim man named Farman Miya on social media. According to media reports, Farman, a resident of Mehwad Kala village under Piran Kaliyar police station in Roorkee, threatened to enter Hindu homes and kill and slit the throats of Hindus in a social media video. Farman stated that local Hindus spoke against 'Miya brothers' (Muslims) and warned that if they did not stop speaking ill of them, he would enter their homes and slit their throats. The accused's video went viral on the internet on 14 March 2026 and also contained other derogatory remarks against Hindus. The accused called himself a 'lion' in the video. However, before tensions could escalate in the area, police led by Station House Officer Ravindra Kumar arrested Farman and took legal measures against him. Following this, Farman appeared in another video apologising to Hindus. The police filed a case against Farman. Rural Superintendent of Police Shekhar Chandra Suyal stated that some individuals are creating an atmosphere of terror on social media. The accused was arrested, and legal action was taken against him.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case is being added to the tracker under the primary category- Hate Speech against Hindus. The subcategory selected is- Violent Threats. Violent threats, explicit, implicit or implied, is 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 other 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 is a clear instance of religiously motivated hate speech, as the Muslim man, Farman Miya, issued violent threats of beheading and murdering Hindus by entering their homes over supposed remarks they made against "Miya brothers" (Muslims), with no evidence of such comments provided. Even if he believed Hindus were at fault, he could have pursued legal measures instead of choosing to threaten brutal murder and throat-slitting, showcasing his deep-seated religious animosity and zeal towards harming Hindus under such minor pretexts as perceived verbal slights against his community. These threats caused profound intimidation, fear, and insecurity in the Hindu community, who felt they could be invaded, attacked, and beheaded in the most savage and dehumanising manner simply for being Hindus, making this a textbook case of a religiously motivated hate crime. This beheading threat cannot be viewed in isolation, as it represents a classic pattern of threats issued by Muslims towards Hindus over minor pretexts or speech perceived as against their community and divine figures like the Prophet Mohammad. Such incidents repeatedly exploit trivial triggers to justify extreme violence, fostering a chilling atmosphere where Hindus live under constant dread of targeted brutality masked as religious retribution. This recurring tactic not only escalates communal divides but also undermines social harmony by normalising calls for savage reprisals against the entire Hindu community, making it a clear case of hate speech. The slogan, “Gustakh-e-Rasool ki Ek hi saza, sar tan se Juda, sar tan se Juda”, which translates to “There is only one punishment for being disrespectful to Rasool (Prophet Muhammad), their head separated from their torso, their head separated from the torso”, is an Islamist clarion call, that has become a staple feature of violent protests that have so far claimed the lives of at least 6 Hindus, including Kanhaiya Lal in Udaipur and Umesh Kolhe in Amravati, after Muslim fundamentalists, egged on by the dog-whistling of Alt News co-founder Mohammed Zubair against former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma, resorted to violence for what they perceived as ‘blasphemy’ against Prophet Muhammad. From Kanpur in India’s northern plains to the southern metropolis of Bengaluru, from Kolkata in the east to Hyderabad in the south, protests in the name of blasphemy have erupted in almost every corner of the country as Muslim extremists took to the streets running amok and shouting “Sar Tan Se Juda” chants over the perceived belief of blasphemy against the Prophet. Though a radical Muslim outfit in Pakistan coined the slogan, it has gained popularity among Islamists in regions beyond its geographical origins. Over the years, we have seen large crowds of Islamists chanting the “Sar Tan Se Juda” slogan, which is nothing but a direct incitement to violence, leading to murders committed in the name of 'blasphemy'. The radicalised outcry is not merely a statement of disapproval; it is a call for the execution of an individual through beheading, based on their religious identity. When this slogan is raised, it sends a clear and terrifying message not just to the individual targeted but also to anyone else who might share similar views or dare to express them. This tactic of intimidation aims to silence dissent and suppress freedom of expression, particularly in religious discourse. It aims to instil fear in the broader Hindu community. The Muslim extremists also use this tactic to settle personal scores with non-Muslims, particularly Hindus, by levelling fabricated charges of blasphemy against them, which causes outrage and paints a target on them. The underlying hatred and animosity toward non-Muslims, especially Hindus, is demonstrated when 'Sar Tan Se Juda' or beheading threats are issued by Muslims. Henceforth, looking at this current case, just on the mere pretext of supposed statements against Muslims, Farman threatened to behead all Hindus, showcasing that this is a clear example of anti-Hindu hate speech. Apart from the beheading threats, Farman also made objectionable remarks against the entire Hindu community in his social media video. This further constituted religiously motivated hate speech that targeted Hindus collectively rather than individuals. By directing a barrage of derogatory statements at Hindus as a whole, vilifying their beliefs, practices, and very existence, he demonstrated unfiltered prejudice, deep contempt, and a calculated intent to dehumanise an entire religious group through public vilification on a widely accessible platform. These remarks were not fleeting or isolated outbursts born of momentary anger. They were deliberate, premeditated expressions of entrenched hate towards the Hindu community. They underscored the perpetrator's profound religious animosity towards Hindus without any trace of remorse, apology, or contextual justification. This inflamed communal tensions and sowed seeds of widespread discord. Additionally, Farman glorified his threats by calling himself a lion in the video. He brazenly exalted his own violent rhetoric with absolute confidence, zero hesitation, or guilt, as if such savagery were a virtuous act worthy of pride. This brazen self-aggrandisement starkly reflected his Islamic supremacist ideology. In this ideology, intimidating, terrorising, and threatening Hindus is not merely tolerated. It is portrayed as a heroic badge of honour and religious duty, rather than the criminal abomination it truly is. Such glorification intensified the hate crime's chilling impact exponentially. It normalised brutality and calls for violence against Hindus in the public domain. It also revealed a dangerous mindset that celebrates religious dominance, subjugation, and fear-mongering as pathways to supremacy. Given that this case meets the parameters of an anti-Hindu hate speech, it is being added to the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker. 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 case, media reports have not stated the exact date when the accused posted the anti-Hindu video threatening to behead Hindus. Henceforth, 14 March 2026, the date when it went viral on the internet, is selected as the indicative incident date. This is recorded for documentation purposes only.
Case Status
Arrested
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
