Brahmin Hindus targeted with calls for physical violence and expulsion by journalist in viral video
India 
13 February, 2026
Case Summary
A video circulated on social media showing Shambhu Kumar Singh, the editor-in-chief of National Dastak, using deeply offensive and abusive language against the Brahmin community and inciting people against them. The video triggered widespread condemnation, with the remarks being described as a serious threat to social harmony and peaceful coexistence. In the video, Shambhu was heard making derogatory statements about Brahmins, referring to certain individuals as a disgrace to the Brahmin name. He then stated that Brahmins deserved to be beaten with shoes and thrown out. The language used throughout the clip was described as extremely insulting and abusive. Shambhu Kumar Singh is a Delhi-based journalist and the editor-in-chief of National Dastak. He had previously contested the Vaishali Lok Sabha [lower house of the Indian Parliament] constituency in Bihar as a candidate of the Bahujan Samaj Party [BSP], having transitioned from journalism to electoral politics. He had publicly supported Bahujan politics and development-based electoral campaigns, citing leaders such as Lalu Prasad Yadav and Mulayam Singh as examples of social activists entering electoral politics. He lost that election. The remarks were widely condemned as an open expression of hostility and hatred that posed a serious threat to communal harmony and peaceful coexistence in society.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The primary category for this case is "Hate speech against Hindus". The sub-category for this case 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. Another sub-category for this case is "Call for genocide/violence against Hindus/specific sects of Hindus" 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. Often, animosity against Hindus or a specific panth/sampradaya/group of Hindus or a specific ideology they hold manifests itself into hate speech and calls for genocide/violence against that specific section of Hindus. For example, it has often been seen that those who hold animosity against the Hindu faith use specific sects/sampradaya/pant of Hindus as a proxy to express hate against Hindus as a whole. It has been seen that the word ‘Hindutva’ has been used to call for violence against those who say they believe in ‘Hindutva’. It is observed that ‘Hindutva’ is only used as a proxy to call for violence against Hindus as a whole, as seen in the Dismantling Global Hindutva conference where speakers admitted that ‘Hindutva’ cannot be eradicated till ‘Hinduism’ is eradicated. The eradication of an entire faith, in turn, is a genocidal call against the entire community that practices that faith. Further, it is also observed that violence against a specific section of Hindus is made, justifying these calls by weaving exaggerated tales of historical injustices. Often, those who hold animosity towards Hindus and their faith attempt to make their animosity more palatable by justifying their hate for a specific section, claiming that they are against that particular section because of their faith in the broader community and the religion they process. Such calls for violence against specific sections of Hindus, as mentioned, is a proxy for their animosity against the entire community and the faith they profess, and therefore, would be considered hate speech under this category. Another sub-category here 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 qualifies as a religiously motivated hate speech incident in which Shambhu Kumar Singh, the editor-in-chief of National Dastak, publicly used deeply abusive language against the Brahmin community, incited people against them, and called for physical violence to be committed against them. The statements were not made in a private setting. They were recorded on video and circulated on social media, amplifying their harmful impact to the widest possible audience. The call for physical violence against Brahmins is the primary religious marker of this case. Singh's statement that Brahmins deserved to be beaten with shoes and thrown out was not a metaphor or a rhetorical flourish. It was a direct and explicit incitement to physical violence against a specific community. The use of the imagery of being beaten with shoes carries particular significance in the Indian cultural context, where such an act represents one of the most degrading forms of public humiliation that can be inflicted on a person. To call for this to be done to an entire community is to call for their collective degradation and expulsion through physical force. The targeting of Brahmins as a Hindu religious and social community is the second religious marker. Brahmins are a community whose identity is inseparably bound to the Hindu religious tradition. They have historically served as the custodians of Hindu scriptural knowledge, ritual practice, and religious learning. An attack on Brahmins as a community is therefore not merely a social or political statement. It is an attack on a group whose identity is defined by their role within the Hindu religious tradition. The abusive language directed at them and the call for their physical expulsion was directed at them specifically because of who they are within the Hindu social and religious order. The incitement of others against the Brahmin community is the third religious marker. Singh did not merely express personal contempt for Brahmins. The video shows him actively inciting his audience against them, encouraging others to act on his stated view that Brahmins deserved to be beaten and expelled. The deliberate mobilisation of an audience against a specific Hindu community through abusive language and calls to violence is a form of hate speech that carries the potential for direct physical harm. When a public figure with a media platform uses that platform to incite hostility against a religious community, the harm extends far beyond the immediate audience of the video. The perpetrator's public profile and platform compound the religious harm in this case. Singh is not a private individual expressing a personal grievance. He is the editor-in-chief of a named media outlet and a former electoral candidate who has contested a Lok Sabha seat. His public profile lends his statements an authority and reach that a private individual's remarks would not carry. The circulation of the video on social media extended that reach further, ensuring that his incitement to violence against the Brahmin community reached an audience far beyond those present when the remarks were originally made. Given that this case met the criteria for a religiously motivated hate speech incident, it was added to the tracker's hate speech database. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records incident dates based on when the crime occurred, not when it was reported or published. The source does not specify the exact date on which the video was originally recorded or when the remarks were first made, noting only that the video was circulating on social media at the time of reporting. The publication date of 14 February 2026 has been used as the indicative incident date for documentation purposes. This was recorded for documentation purposes only.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
State and Establishment
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
