Hindu wedding attacked over DJ music, attendees subjected to brutal assault and casteist slurs by Muslim men in Sambhal

Case ID : 30a7d1b | Location : Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, India | Date of Incident : Fri, 10 April, 2026

Case ID : 30a7d1b

Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, India

10 April, 2026

Hindu wedding attacked over DJ music, attendees subjected to brutal assault and casteist slurs by Muslim men in Sambhal

Attack not resulting in death

Communal clash/attack

Hate speech against Hindus

Anti-Hindu slurs, mocking faith

Case Summary

In the Asmoli police station area of Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, a Hindu wedding event was attacked, and Hindu attendees were brutally assaulted by a group of Muslim men. This dispute began over the playing of DJ music during the wedding event. During the attack, the Muslim perpetrators were hurling casteist slurs at the Hindu victims. According to reports, the wedding of Raju Valmiki's son, a Dalit Hindu man and resident of Madala Fatehpur village, was taking place. The wedding ceremony occurred on the evening of 11 April 2026. Raju's nephew, Surendra, a resident of Gijod Sector 53, Noida, had also arrived to attend the event. Along with the feast, a DJ was arranged, to which the women of the house and relatives were dancing. During this, some men from the Muslim community living in the neighbourhood arrived at the scene and began protesting the DJ playing. A few Muslim persons, namely Arkan, Furkan, Tahir, and Tatheer, began abusing the Hindu attendees with casteist slurs. When the Hindus dancing to the DJ protested, the dispute escalated, and soon a heated argument between the two sides began. This further escalated as the Muslims began assaulting the Hindu attendees and even began stone pelting. This further led to a communal clash between Hindus and Muslims. The fight caused chaos in the pandal. Panic spread among the guests and villagers present, completely ruining the atmosphere of the event. Meanwhile, someone filmed the entire incident and posted it on social media. The police were informed, and as they arrived at the scene, the Muslim men began to flee. The police brought the situation under control and tried to maintain law and order. One of the Hindu victims, Surendra, filed a complaint with the police, demanding action against the Muslim perpetrators. Taking the matter seriously, the police registered a First Information Report against the four Muslim perpetrators for assaulting Hindus and using casteist slurs. Station House Officer Mohit Baliyan stated that a report had been filed based on the victim's complaint, and the matter was being investigated, and that strict action would be taken against the culprits.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

The first primary category selected in this case is- Attack not resulting in death. The subcategory selected is- Communal Clash/Attack. Communal clash is a form of collective violence that involves clashes between groups belonging to different religious identities. For a communal clash between Hindus and non-Hindus to qualify as a religiously motivated hate crime, the trigger of the violence itself would have to be anti-Hindu in essence. For example, if there is a Hindu religious procession that comes under attack from a non-Hindu mob and after the initial attack, Hindus retaliate in self-defence, leading to a communal clash between the two religious communities. While at a later stage, both communities are involved in the clash/violence, the initial trigger of the violence was by the non-Hindu mob against the Hindus and therefore, it could safely be termed as an anti-Hindu violence. Further, the trigger would also have to be religiously motivated. In the cited example, the attack by the non-Hindu mob was against religious processions and therefore, can be concluded to be religiously motivated. In some cases, the trigger may be non-religious, however, it develops into religious violence against Hindus at a later stage. In such cases too, the foundational animosity towards Hindus becomes the motivating factor of the crime and therefore, it would be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime against Hindus under this category. The second primary category selected is- 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. In this case, a Hindu wedding event was attacked by a group of Muslims. During the attack, Hindu attendees were brutally assaulted and casteist slurs were hurled at the victims. This entire attack happened over the pretext of DJ music being played. Overall, this makes it a clear case of a religiously motivated hate crime, as the violence targeted a sacred Hindu ritual central to family and community life, erupting not from any genuine grievance but from intolerance towards Hindu celebrations. The ferocity of the assault on innocent Hindu guests, including women dancing joyfully, reveals a premeditated effort to humiliate and silence Hindu voices during a moment of profound cultural joy. Such acts inflict lasting trauma on families, shattering the sanctity of traditions passed down through generations and signalling a broader pattern of aggression against Hindu public expressions of faith. The use of casteist slurs while attacking the Hindu attendees makes the religious motivation of the crime crystal clear. Because in this case, the casteist slurs served as anti-Hindu denigration rather than insults lodged at the victims' caste. Here, some may claim that a caste-specific slur is an insult lodged at the Dalit identity of the victims. However, as far as Abrahamic religions are concerned, the micro-identities of caste, region, and language are secondary. It is the religious identity that drives the animosity of the perpetrators against the Hindu victims. So even in this case, casteist slurs serve as anti-Hindu abuses, making religious animosity behind the attack more apparent. Hindu weddings hold immense significance as vibrant ceremonies uniting two souls under divine blessings, filled with rituals like the saptapadi, feasts, music, and dances that strengthen familial bonds and community harmony. Henceforth, attacking Hindu weddings and brutally assaulting Hindu devotees over the mere pretext of playing DJ music showcases a clear case of disproportionate reaction. Even if the Muslim perpetrators had a problem with the DJ music being played, they could have approached the authorities or pursued legal action. Instead, they resorted to assaulting and stone-pelting at the Hindu devotees, clearly showcasing deep-seated religious animosity towards the Hindu community. Such disproportionate and violent reaction against Hindu victims demonstrates the religiously motivated nature of the crime. It also showcases the Islamic supremacist mindset of the perpetrators, aimed at disrupting Hindu cultural events like weddings and asserting Muslim dominance and street power over Hindus, making it a clear case of an anti-Hindu hate crime. Overall, this case meets several parameters of a religiously motivated crime. Therefore, it is being added to the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker. Disclaimer: In this case, multiple victims were targeted, including women. However, the total number of victims has not been specified. Only three people have been named: Raju Valmiki, his son, and his nephew Surendra. Hence, a conservative victim count of '3' has been selected for documentation purposes only. Similarly, in the case of the perpetrators, only four Muslim men have been specified by name, and the total number has not been mentioned. Hence, the perpetrator count has been recorded as '4'. This is a conservative estimate recorded for documentation purposes only.