Hindu family returning from temple brutally attacked for chanting “Jai Mata Ki” by Muslim mob in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh

Case ID : 30a81e1 | Location : Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India | Date of Incident : Thu, 30 April, 2026

Case ID : 30a81e1

Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India

30 April, 2026

Hindu family returning from temple brutally attacked for chanting “Jai Mata Ki” by Muslim mob in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh

Attack not resulting in death

Attack against Hindu devotees

Attacked for Hindu identity

Communal clash/attack

Case Summary

In the Kaila Bhatta area of Ghaziabad, a Hindu family returning from a temple pilgrimage was confronted and brutally attacked for chanting “Jai Mata Ki” by a Muslim mob. The incident occurred on 1 May 2026, when the Hindu family was returning from a Devi temple, after completing a traditional ritual known as “jaat lagana” and was on its way home in the evening while chanting religious slogans such as “Jai Mata Ki,” a devotional slogan associated with the worship of the Mother Goddess in Hindu tradition. During this time, a group of Muslim men objected to the chanting, leading to a sudden escalation. Police said that Farukh Salauddin, along with around 15 to 20 companions, attacked the Hindu family using bricks, stones, and sharp weapons. During the violence, women in the family were also misbehaved, and their clothes were torn. The sudden assault left nine people injured, including a pregnant woman, who was later taken to the hospital for treatment. The incident created immediate tension in the area, with fears of further escalation prompting a swift deployment of police forces. Police intervened promptly, brought the situation under control, and ensured medical assistance for the injured. A case was registered at the local police station, and at least ten individuals were detained in connection with the violence. However, the police claimed that the incident began as a dispute during movement along the road but rapidly escalated into a broader clash involving stone pelting from both sides.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category of - Attack not resulting in death". Within it, the sub-category selected is - Attack against Hindu devotees. Hindu devotees are a few of the easiest targets of religiously motivated hate crimes because, during the festival/procession/puja, etc., for non-Hindus, it is easy to profile their victims based on religion. Hindu devotees come under attack on several occasions by individual non-Hindus or mobs of non-Hindus owing to their animosity against Hinduism, its symbols and tradition/practices. There are several instances of Hindu devotees being attacked while they worship in temples or temporary religious structures, during religious processions, doing bhajan/kirtan/puja in their own homes, in the residential society, etc. These attacks are perpetrated by non-Hindus primarily because of their animosity towards Hindus and their faith. In some cases, the trigger for the violence may be non-religious; however, two elements make these hate crimes. First, the Hindus who come under attack are attacked violently while indulging in religious activity. Whether they are in a place of worship or not is immaterial to the crime. When individuals are attacked while indulging in religious practices, the attack in itself is a hindrance to their freedom to practice religion and therefore constitutes a hate crime. Secondly, religious supremacist doctrines and ideologies deem religious practices of Hindus to be offensive ab initio since they are considered “sinful” by these ideologies, worthy to be annihilated by force or coercion. Driven by these religious supremacist ideologies and doctrines, the attacks against Hindu devotees stem from intrinsic animosity towards Hinduism. In some cases, the trigger for the violence may be non-religious; however, it develops into a religiously motivated crime during the course of the violence. Since these attacks stem from animosity towards Hindus and Hinduism, they are considered religiously motivated hate crimes under this category. The other sub-category selected is - Attacked for Hindu identity. In several cases, Hindus are attacked merely for their Hindu identity without any perceived provocation. A classic example of this category of religiously motivated hate crime is a murder in 2016. 7 ISIS terrorists were convicted for shooting a school principal in Kanpur because they got ‘triggered’ seeing the Kalava on his wrist and tilak that he had put. In this, the Hindu victim had offered no provocation except for his Hindu religious identity. The motivation for the murder was purely religious, driven by religious supremacy. Such cases where Hindus are targeted merely for their religious identity would be documented as a hate crime under this category. The other sub-category 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. This case has been added to the tracker as a religiously motivated hate crime because a Hindu family was attacked while returning from a Devi temple after performing a ritual known as “jaat lagana”, during which they were visibly expressing their faith by chanting devotional slogans such as “Jai Mata Ki.” The family, identifiable by their participation in a Hindu religious observance, was confronted and subsequently subjected to a violent assault by a Muslim mob using stones, bricks, and sharp weapons. The nature of the attack, directed at Hindu individuals engaged in religious chanting, establishes a clear religious dimension to the incident, as the victims were not involved in any unrelated dispute but were targeted in the immediate context of a religious expression. The ritual of “jaat lagana” holds cultural and religious importance in Hindu tradition, often performed as an act of gratitude to the Mother Goddess upon fulfilment of a wish. It involves visiting a temple and conducting specific offerings or rites, making the return journey an extension of a sacred observance. Chanting “Jai Mata Ki” is a common devotional expression associated with the worship of the Goddess and reflects a public affirmation of faith. The attack on individuals for the chanting "Jai Mata Ki" turned a moment of religious devotion into one of violence and fear, thereby infringing upon the community’s right to practise and express its religion freely. The manner in which the assault unfolded further reinforces its targeted character. A Muslim mob approximately 15–20 individuals carried out a coordinated attack on the family, resulting in injuries to nine people, including a pregnant woman. The use of weapons such as stones and sharp objects, combined with the scale of participation, indicates that the violence was not a minor altercation but a deliberate and forceful act. Women in the family were also physically assaulted, with their clothes being torn, adding a layer of humiliation and intimidation to the attack. Such conduct reflects an intent not only to cause bodily harm but also to degrade and terrorise the Hindu victims, in an effort to curtail outward expression of Hindu identity. The victims were identifiable solely by their religious chanting, meaning their religious identity was the primary factor in their selection as targets. They were not engaged in any provocation but were attacked while exercising their right to religious expression. The Hindu devotees were attacked not for any personal actions but because they were Hindus and were visibly expressing their Hindu identity in public. Collective acts of violence of this nature are often intended not only to harm immediate victims but also to send a broader message of intimidation to the community, discouraging public expressions of faith. It was not merely an act of physical aggression; it was an attempt to disrupt a deeply revered ritual and instil fear among the Hindu participants. The timing and context of the incident are significant. Religious chanting is a public affirmation of Hindu identity and collective devotion, and attacks on them strike at the core of religious freedom. Such actions are not spontaneous but reflect a willingness to use violence to assert dominance and suppress the religious practices of another community. Furthermore, the police claimed that the incident began as a dispute during movement along the road, but rapidly escalated into a broader clash involving stone pelting from both sides. The police, in many such cases, where the motive behind the crime is obvious but not explicitly mentioned, deny that the crime committed was in any way motivated by a religious bias or say that there was ‘no communal angle’ to the crime. Several factors are generally at play here. Many a time, the police downplay incidents of low-level communal crime because it is their jurisdiction that comes under question. The police also often say that there was ‘no communal angle’ to a crime when there was one because they wish to ensure that, owing to the crime already committed, there is no further flare-up in the area. Likewise, the Left media and the leftist elite are also inclined to emphasise this "no communal angle" trope, especially wherever the victim of the crime is a Hindu. However, only a police statement or a media report, for instance, cannot be enough to determine whether there is a communal angle present in the crime that has been committed. In fact, to determine whether the crime is communal in nature or not, we need to give emphasis to the ground realities. For example, in the case of Rinku Sharma, the Bajrang Dal activist who was mercilessly stabbed in his house in front of his family members in Delhi’s Mangolpuri area in the year 2021, the leftist media and the leftist ecosystem had tried to peddle that there was no communal angle to the crime. Even the police denied that the crime was communal in nature. However, Opindia spoke to several people who are on the ground with the family of Rinku Sharma, and we were told that the communal tension in the area is palpable. The family of Rinku Sharma has said that the Muslims of the area held a grudge against Rinku ever since he celebrated the Ram Mandir verdict. Like the case of Rinku Sharma, those cases where even if the police have denied a communal angle or the leftist media have gone on an overdrive to peddle the ‘no communal angle’ trope, the ground reality, like the victim’s family or relative's testimonies, make it clear that there was an obvious religious bias that led to the crime, will be documented in this tracker. Going by the same logic, the circumstances surrounding the incident cannot be ignored. Taken together, the circumstances of the incident, the targeting of the Hindu family for religious chanting, the use of collective violence, the assault on women, and the attempt to disrupt a visible expression of faith demonstrate that the victims were attacked in the context of their religious identity. The case, therefore, meets the criteria of a religiously motivated hate crime, as it involved hostility directed at individuals based on their participation in Hindu religious practice and sought to instil fear around the public expression of that identity.