Minor Hindu student terrorised over ‘Jai Shri Ram’ chant; Muslim classmates assault him, force him to watch throat-slitting videos and apologise on camera

Case ID : 30a8e7f | Location : Baruipur, West Bengal, India | Date of Incident : Wed, 3 June, 2026

Case ID : 30a8e7f

Baruipur, West Bengal, India

3 June, 2026

Minor Hindu student terrorised over ‘Jai Shri Ram’ chant; Muslim classmates assault him, force him to watch throat-slitting videos and apologise on camera

Attack resulting in death

Attacked for Hindu identity

Case Summary

In Baruipur, West Bengal, a minor Hindu student was targeted, humiliated, and assaulted by his Muslim classmates after they mistook him for a boy seen in a viral social media video chanting "Jai Shri Ram." The victim was forced to watch a graphic throat-slitting video, dragged into a school bathroom, made to apologise on camera while holding his ears, and physically assaulted when he resisted. The incident took place on 4 June 2026 at Madarhat High School in Baruipur. According to reports, the harassment began after a video of another student chanting "Jai Shri Ram" circulated on social media. The victim resembled the boy in the video, leading a group of Muslim students to wrongly identify him as the person responsible. One of the videos that later surfaced online showed seven to eight students surrounding the Hindu boy, identified as Debjit. In the footage, one of the Muslim students is seen instructing him to face the camera, hold his ears, and publicly state that he would not repeat his "mistake." Visibly frightened and distressed, Debjit complied and apologised on camera. However, the apology did not end the abuse. As soon as he finished speaking, one of the boys struck him on the head and reprimanded him for chanting "Jai Shri Ram." Others then joined in, slapping and assaulting him while continuing to mock and intimidate him. The video suggested that Debjit was being punished specifically for the perceived act of chanting the Hindu religious slogan. A second video showed the victim narrating his ordeal. Speaking in Bengali, he stated that after returning to school on 4 June, a group of students confronted him around 2 p.m. and dragged him to the bathroom, where they forced him to watch violent throat-slitting videos. When he refused, they told him that they would only let him go if he held his ears and apologised on camera. He complied with their demands, but the Muslim boys continued to abuse him for chanting 'Jai Shri Ram' and physically assaulted him. He stated that he was slapped so hard that the ringing sensation in his ear continued afterwards. According to his account, the abuse did not stop there. After returning to the classroom, the students assaulted him again and warned him not to report the incident to teachers. Although the matter was later brought to the attention of school authorities, the victim's family stated that no action was taken against the accused students. They further said that the boy sustained multiple injuries and experienced hearing problems following the assault. The family also stated that the fear and trauma caused by the incident forced him to stop attending school. The victim and his family maintained that he had no connection to the Jai Shri Ram viral video. According to them, another student had uploaded the video containing the "Jai Shri Ram" chant, and the victim was targeted solely because he resembled that student.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

This incident has been added to the tracker under the category- Attack not resulting in death, and within this the subcategory 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, cases where the attack led to the death of the Hindu victim/s would be documented. The primary religious marker in this case was the fact that the victim was targeted for chanting "Jai Shri Ram," one of the most widely used and benign expressions of Hindu faith. The assault was not triggered by a personal dispute, academic disagreement, or disciplinary issue. The victim was singled out because he was believed to be associated with a video in which the slogan was chanted. The demand that he publicly apologise for this supposed "offence" demonstrates that the perpetrators viewed the expression of Hindu religious identity as something deserving punishment and humiliation. The incident also reflects a growing pattern of intolerance towards the chant "Jai Shri Ram." For millions of Hindus, the slogan is a devotional greeting and an expression of reverence towards Bhagwan Shri Ram. Yet, in several recent incidents, Hindus have faced harassment, intimidation, and violence merely for uttering these words. The fact that a minor student was forced to hold his ears and apologise for chanting "Jai Shri Ram" is significant because it shows that the perpetrators did not treat the slogan as a harmless expression of faith but as something that warranted public punishment. Such hostility towards a peaceful Hindu religious expression reveals a deeper discomfort with the open assertion of Hindu identity itself. Another important religious marker was the forced apology. The victim was made to face a camera, hold his ears, and declare that he would not repeat his alleged mistake. Such acts are designed not merely to punish but to humiliate. The objective was to force the victim to publicly distance himself from an expression of his Hindu faith and to demonstrate his submission before those targeting him. The fact that the assault continued even after the apology establishes that the objective was never an apology itself but the degradation of the victim. The most disturbing aspect of the incident was the deliberate effort to force the Hindu student to watch graphic throat-slitting videos. This had no connection to any school-related matter and served no purpose other than intimidation. The choice of such content is important because it exposed a minor Hindu student to imagery associated with extreme violence and brutality. The objective appears to have been psychological domination through fear. The victim was not merely assaulted physically but subjected to a form of terrorisation designed to make him feel vulnerable, helpless, and intimidated. This aspect of the case is particularly noteworthy because it reflects a mindset where a Hindu's refusal to participate in or submit to something imposed upon him is met with hostility. A similar pattern was visible in the recent killing of Hindu teenager Surya Chauhan, who was attacked after refusing to watch the slaughter of a goat during Bakrid celebrations. In both cases, the immediate trigger was not aggression by the Hindu victim but his refusal to comply with what was being forced upon him. While the facts of the two incidents differ, both reveal an attempt to punish Hindus for exercising their right to reject conduct that they found disturbing, uncomfortable, or incompatible with their beliefs. Such behaviour reflects a dangerous mindset of religious supremacy, where a Hindu's refusal to comply is viewed not as a personal choice but as a challenge that must be met with intimidation or violence. Another disturbing aspect of this case is that all the accused were minor students. The victim and the perpetrators belonged to the same age group and studied in the same school, yet the Hindu boy was singled out, humiliated, and assaulted over a perceived expression of Hindu faith. The fact that children were willing to drag a classmate into a bathroom, force him to apologise for chanting "Jai Shri Ram," make him watch graphic throat-slitting videos, and physically assault him raises troubling questions about the origins of such hostility. Children are rarely born with animosity towards the religious beliefs of others. When a group of minors collectively treats a harmless Hindu religious slogan as something deserving punishment and humiliation, it suggests that prejudices and intolerant attitudes may already have been internalised at a young age. The incident, therefore, highlights a broader concern about the normalisation of hostility towards Hindu symbols, slogans, and expressions of faith among sections of society. The conduct of the accused indicates that the victim was not being punished for misconduct but for a perceived act of Hindu religious expression. The willingness to publicly shame, intimidate, and physically assault a fellow student over the chant "Jai Shri Ram" demonstrates an intolerance that goes beyond ordinary school bullying and reflects hostility towards the open expression of Hindu identity. It reveals an intrinsic hostility towards the Hindu faith, where even a routine expression of devotion is treated as something deserving punishment and humiliation. For these reasons, the incident qualifies as a religiously motivated hate crime and has been included in the tracker.