Hindu activist receives death threats for supporting murdered Hindu teenager's family

Case ID : 30a91fe | Location : Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India | Date of Incident : Wed, 24 June, 2026

Case ID : 30a91fe

Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India

24 June, 2026

Hindu activist receives death threats for supporting murdered Hindu teenager's family

Hate speech against Hindus

Violent threats

Attack not resulting in death

Attacked for opposing radicals or trying to save victim

Attacked for supporting/being part of perceived Hindu party/org or working for Hindu community

Case Summary

A Hindu activist who stood by the family of murdered Hindu teenager Surya Chauhan began receiving death threats after supporting the victim's relatives in their pursuit of justice. The threats were directed at Sonu Sharma, the Khoda president of the Hindu Raksha Dal, in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. The intimidation emerged in the aftermath of the murder of Class 11 student Surya Chauhan and specifically targeted the Hindu activist for assisting the bereaved family. Surya Chauhan, a 17 year old Hindu student, had been stabbed to death with a butcher knife on 28th May 2026 by a group of Muslim youths identified as Asad, Nawab, Farhan, Atif and Sariq. He was stabbed to death after refusing to witness goat slaughter on Bakrid. He was also subjected to 'halal taunts' before the attack by Muslim youths. The killing triggered widespread outrage in the area and members of Hindu organisations came forward to support the grieving family. Following the murder, Sonu Sharma and other members of the Hindu Raksha Dal remained in contact with Surya's relatives and assisted them with their safety and other immediate needs. According to Sonu Sharma, he had been continuously supporting Surya's family since the murder. During this period, some individuals took offence to his support for the Hindu victim's family. Over several days, he began receiving death threats on Instagram from an account operated under the Muslim name "Yusuf". The messages included threats to kill him and members of his family. The threats were directed not at an individual engaged in a personal dispute but at a Hindu activist who had publicly stood with the family of a Hindu murder victim. The intimidation arose directly from his involvement in assisting the victim's family and from his efforts to ensure support and protection for them following the killing. After receiving the threats, Sonu Sharma filed a complaint stating that he and his family were in danger. Hindu Raksha Dal functionaries also submitted a report against the individual responsible for the threatening messages and demanded action. The police registered a case and initiated an investigation into the Instagram account. Assistant Commissioner of Police, Indirapuram, Abhishek Srivastava stated that the account was being examined and that efforts were underway to identify the person behind the threats and to take further action in the matter.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category of - Hate speech against Hindus. Within it, the sub-category 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. Another primary category selected for this case is - Attack not resulting in death. The sub-category selected in this is - Attacked for opposing radicals or trying to save victim. In several cases, Hindus are attacked for opposing religiously motivated crimes being committed against a fellow Hindu or simply for voicing an opinion opposing radical elements, who either have in the past or continue to persecute Hindus. In such cases, the initial attack against the victim, against which the Hindu was trying to defend the victim, would also need to be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime. Since the initial crime itself was religiously motivated and the subsequent crime of attempting to save the victim or speaking against the radical elements ends up inviting a violent attack, it would also be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime under this category. The other subcategory selected is - Attacked for supporting/being part of perceived Hindu party/org or working for Hindu community. In several cases, Hindus are attacked specifically or tangentially for their association with parties or organisations perceived to be pro-Hindu and/or for working in favour of the Hindu community. One of the classic cases was the attack against a Bharatiya Janata Party Yuva Morcha (BJYM) worker Praveen Nettaru. Nettaru was attacked and hacked to death for his association with Hindu organizations and his work for the Hindu community. He was murdered by PFI, a terror organization which aimed to commit a genocide of Hindus, target Hindu leaders specifically and turn India into an Islamic Nation. In such cases, it is possible that the immediate trigger for the violence is non-religious – either according to the perpetrator or the police. However, there are surrounding circumstances from which the conclusion can be reached that the victim was attacked for his association with a Hindu organization. In a similar case, Rinku Sharma was attacked by radicals. He was a member of Bajrang Dal and regularly worked for the Hindu community. While the police cited a different non-religious trigger for the attack, it is true that he was associated to a Hindu organization and the family of Rinku Sharma specifically attributed his gruesome murder to him working for Bajrang Dal and raising Jai Shree Ram slogans. Such cases are intrinsically driven by religious hate and would therefore be documented as a hate crime under this category. This case qualified as a religiously motivated hate crime because the victim was threatened specifically for standing with the family of a murdered Hindu teenager and for his role as a Hindu activist working for the protection and welfare of the Hindu community. The hostility directed towards Sonu Sharma did not arise from any personal dispute with the perpetrator. It emerged directly from his involvement in seeking justice for a Hindu victim and from his public association with a Hindu organisation. The threats therefore targeted both his individual role and the wider Hindu causes he represented. The death threats sent by the individual operating the Instagram account under the name "Yusuf" carried an explicit message of violence and intimidation. Threatening to kill Sonu Sharma and his family members was not an act of random abuse but an attempt to silence a Hindu activist through fear of physical harm. Death threats are particularly significant in cases involving religious tensions because they seek to deter individuals from continuing activities that are perceived as advancing the interests of their religious community. The use of threats against a person who had publicly supported a Hindu victim's family demonstrates an intention to punish and intimidate him because of his actions on behalf of Hindus. Such conduct reveals hostility towards Hindu advocacy and sends a broader message that those who openly defend Hindu victims may themselves become targets of violence. The circumstances in which the threats were issued are equally significant. Sonu Sharma began receiving the threats only after he stepped forward to help the family of Surya Chauhan, a Hindu teenager who had been murdered by a group of Muslim youths. He provided support, remained in contact with the family, and assisted them during a period of grief and insecurity. The threats therefore arose directly from his decision to aid a Hindu victim's relatives and support their pursuit of justice. This demonstrates that the perpetrator viewed assistance to the Hindu family itself as objectionable and sought to discourage such support through intimidation. The targeting of a person for helping the family of a deceased Hindu victim reflects an attempt to isolate the victims, discourage solidarity within the Hindu community, and create fear among those who may wish to come forward in support of Hindu victims in similar circumstances. The religious dimension of the incident is further reinforced by Sonu Sharma's position as the Khoda president of the Hindu Raksha Dal, an organisation that works for Hindu causes and provides assistance to members of the Hindu community during periods of distress and communal tension. His identity as a representative of a Hindu organisation was not incidental to the threats. It was precisely this public role and his visible support for a Hindu family that made him a target. By directing violent threats against the president of a Hindu organisation for carrying out activities connected to the welfare of Hindus, the perpetrator sought to intimidate not only one individual but also the wider network of Hindu activists and organisations engaged in community support and advocacy. Such threats attempt to create a chilling effect by conveying that those who organise, advocate for, or protect Hindu interests may face violent consequences for doing so. The impact of these threats extends beyond Sonu Sharma and his family. Intimidating a Hindu activist for assisting the relatives of a murdered Hindu teenager sends a broader message to the Hindu community that support for Hindu victims may invite retaliation. It seeks to discourage collective action, weaken community solidarity, and deter individuals from participating in organisations that work for Hindu interests. The targeting of a prominent member of a Hindu organisation therefore carried a wider communal dimension and was aimed at creating fear among those who publicly identify with or work for Hindu causes. Taken together, the death threats issued by Yusuf, the targeting of Sonu Sharma for helping the family of a murdered Hindu teenager, and the hostility directed towards him because of his position within the Hindu Raksha Dal demonstrate a clear pattern of religiously motivated intimidation. The victim was not threatened because of any private dispute or personal enmity. He was targeted because he stood with a Hindu victim's family and because he represented a Hindu organisation engaged in community work. The threats therefore reflected hostility towards Hindu activism, Hindu solidarity, and efforts undertaken on behalf of the Hindu community. Given that this case met the parameters of a religiously motivated hate crime, it was added to the hate crime database of the tracker. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records incident dates based on when a crime occurs rather than when it is reported in the media. However, in this case, the available media reports do not specify the exact date of the threats made to Sonu Sharma. Accordingly, the date on which the incident was published in the media, 25th June 2026, has been adopted as the indicative incident date for documentation purposes only.