Hindu faith mocked as Muslim journalist makes derogatory remarks against Hindu deities and temples in Kolhapur, Maharashtra
Kolhapur, Maharashtra, India 
7 July, 2026
Case Summary
Hindu sentiments were outraged in Kolhapur after a Muslim journalist made offensive remarks about Hindu deities and Hindu temples. The incident led to demands for legal action and culminated in a public apology from the journalist. According to reports, the accused, Hussain Sheikh, a reporter for a local newspaper, stated, "Hindu gods are stones. Why do you go to temples? Why do you give donations? Instead, help living people." The remarks were insulting to Hindu religious beliefs and places of worship, leading to widespread objections from members of the Hindu community. Following the remarks, the Sakal Hindu Samaj, a Hindu organisation, submitted a memorandum to the Jaisinghpur Police Station demanding legal action against Hussain Sheikh for hurting Hindu religious sentiments. The memorandum was supported by representatives of several Hindu organisations and public figures. Those present during the submission of the memorandum included Shri Shivpratishthan Hindustan activists Shri Rajendra Gadiwadar and Shri Shailendra Lohiya, Councillor Shri Santosh Jadhav, BJP member Shri Mahendra Daingade, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh member Shri Mahendra Rajput, Shri Sunil Bhore, Shri Dhirajlal Patel, Shri Kailash Deshmukh, and Hindu Janajagruti Samiti member Shri Sanjay Ghatge. Following the pressure and demands for action by the Sakal Hindu Samaj, Hussain Sheikh issued a written explanation and publicly apologised for his remarks. In his apology, he stated, "I apologise to my Hindu brothers. I did not intend to hurt anyone's sentiments. I will ensure that my statement does not hurt the sentiments of the entire Hindu community.''
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The primary category selected in this case 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. This case is a clear example of religiously motivated hate speech as the Muslim perpetrator made derogatory remarks targeting Hindu deities, temples, and the religious practices of the Hindu community. By referring to Hindu deities as "stones", questioning why Hindus visit temples, and criticising donations made to Hindu temples, the perpetrator singled out core aspects of the Hindu faith for ridicule and contempt. These remarks were not directed at any secular institution or public policy but at sacred religious beliefs and places of worship that hold profound significance for Hindus. As the statements were specifically aimed at denigrating Hindu religious identity and practices, this constitutes a clear instance of religiously motivated hate speech and, consequently, a religiously motivated hate incident. Hindu deities occupy the central place in Hindu religious life and are revered by millions of devotees as sacred manifestations of the Divine. They are worshipped through daily prayers, rituals, festivals, and offerings, and are regarded with the utmost devotion and respect. Likewise, Hindu temples are among the holiest institutions in Hinduism. They are not merely physical structures but sacred spaces where devotees gather to worship, perform religious ceremonies, seek spiritual guidance, celebrate festivals, and preserve their cultural and religious traditions. Temples also function as important centres of community life and charitable activity. Therefore, the act of dismissing Hindu deities as "mere stones" while simultaneously ridiculing the practice of visiting temples and making donations to them directly attacks beliefs and institutions that are fundamental to Hindu religious identity. Such remarks demonstrate hostility towards the Hindu faith, its places of worship, and the religious practices of the Hindu community, making this a clear case of religiously motivated hate speech. The perpetrator's description of Hindu deities as "stones" is particularly offensive because it seeks to reduce sacred objects of worship to lifeless objects, thereby mocking the beliefs of millions of Hindus. Within Hinduism, deities are revered, honoured, and worshipped with deep faith and devotion. Devotees regard them as living divine presences deserving of the highest respect and form profound emotional and spiritual bonds with them throughout their lives. Referring to these revered deities in a derogatory manner is therefore not a neutral opinion but an insult directed at the very foundation of Hindu religious belief. Such language reflects deep-seated religious hostility towards Hinduism and conveys contempt for the beliefs and identity of the Hindu community. Similarly, the perpetrator's remarks questioning why Hindus visit temples cannot reasonably be interpreted as a genuine invitation to theological debate or charitable reflection. Instead, when read in the context of his other statements, they clearly sought to ridicule Hindu religious practices and portray temple worship as futile and devoid of value. Although encouraging charitable giving is, in itself, a positive and socially beneficial message, the manner and context in which it was expressed are crucial. Rather than advocating charity as a universal principle, the perpetrator deliberately singled out Hindu temples and Hindu devotees while disparaging their religious practices. He did not direct comparable criticism towards his own religious community or its places of worship. By selectively portraying Hindu temples as undeserving of donations, the remarks cease to be an appeal for charity and instead become an attempt to demean, delegitimise, and undermine Hindu religious institutions. This selective targeting, viewed alongside his other derogatory statements, strongly demonstrates that the remarks were driven by hostility towards the Hindu faith rather than any genuine concern for charitable giving. The fact that the perpetrator is a journalist further aggravates the seriousness of the incident. Journalists occupy positions of public trust and possess the ability to influence public discourse and shape societal attitudes. Such positions carry a heightened responsibility to communicate in a fair, respectful, and responsible manner, particularly on matters relating to religion and vulnerable communities. When a journalist uses that platform to make derogatory remarks about a particular religion and its sacred beliefs, there is a greater risk that such rhetoric will normalise prejudice, encourage similar expressions of hostility, and contribute to an environment in which contempt towards that religious community becomes more socially acceptable. Consequently, the perpetrator's professional position increases the gravity and potential impact of the hate speech. Therefore, as this incident satisfies the parameters of a religiously motivated hate incident by targeting Hindu deities, Hindu places of worship, and the religious practices of the Hindu community because of their faith, it is being included in the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records incident dates based on when an incident actually occurred rather than when it was reported by the media. However, in this case, the exact date on which the accused made the remarks has not been disclosed in the available reports. Accordingly, 7 July 2026, the date on which the incident was reported by the media, has been selected as the indicative incident date. This date has been recorded solely for documentation purposes.
Case Status
Complaint filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
