Hindu priest threatened with death, devotees abused and pooja obstructed by Muslim man in Ratlam, Madhya Pradesh

Case ID : 30a9647 | Location : Ratlam, Madhya Pradesh, India | Date of Incident : Fri, 10 July, 2026

Case ID : 30a9647

Ratlam, Madhya Pradesh, India

10 July, 2026

Hindu priest threatened with death, devotees abused and pooja obstructed by Muslim man in Ratlam, Madhya Pradesh

Hate speech against Hindus

Violent threats

Anti-Hindu slurs, mocking faith

Attack not resulting in death

Attack against Hindu devotees

Attack on Hindu religious representations

Encroachment or illicit takeover of temple land/land near temple

Case Summary

In Jaora town of Ratlam district, Madhya Pradesh, a Hindu temple priest and local Hindu devotees were threatened, abused, and obstructed from offering prayers at a temple by a Muslim man identified as Mohammad Guddu and others. The accused repeatedly prevented the priest from performing regular worship, threatened him with death, and created a hostile atmosphere around the temple, while local Hindus stated that the actions formed part of an effort to facilitate the encroachment of the temple premises. According to the temple priest, Nand Kishore Mali, Mohammad Guddu repeatedly abused him and Hindu devotees for offering prayers at the Hanumanganj temple. He threatened the priest with dire consequences and warned him not to perform pooja at the temple. The priest stated that these acts had continued for several years, creating fear among him, his family, and devotees visiting the temple. Members of the Sarv Hindu Samaj stated that Mohammad Guddu and others deliberately dumped waste on the temple premises to discourage devotees from visiting. They further stated that women associated with the group threatened devotees with lathis, while children abused the priest and Hindu worshippers. According to the Hindu organisation, these acts were carried out repeatedly to disrupt religious worship and create an atmosphere of intimidation around the temple. The priest and members of the local Hindu community further stated that Mohammad Guddu regularly prohibited Hindus from offering prayers at the temple and told them that performing pooja made people ill, and therefore they should stop worshipping. They also stated that the accused had encroached upon temple land and organised functions on the encroached area. Residents stated that these actions were part of a deliberate attempt to gradually extend the encroachment over the entire temple premises. Following the incident, members of the Sarv Hindu Samaj submitted a memorandum to the City Police Station in Jaora, addressing it to the CSP and the Station House Officer. They demanded police protection for priest Nand Kishore Mali, registration of an FIR against those responsible for threatening the priest and obstructing Hindu worship, and the removal of the encroachment from the temple premises. At the time of writing this report, no official statement had been issued by the administration or the police regarding the matter. Members of the Sarv Hindu Samaj stated that they would launch an agitation if prompt action was not taken.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

In this case, the first primary category selected is: Hate Speech against Hindus. The subcategory selected is Violent Threats. Violent threats, explicit, implicit or implied, are 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 – which 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. The other sub-category 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 be used 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 from 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. The other primary category selected is: Attack not resulting in death. The subcategory 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 category selected is: Attack on Hindu religious representations. Within this, the subcategory selected is- Encroachment or illicit takeover of temple land/land near temple. In Hinduism, a temple is the abode of the Deity. The Deity in the Temple is consecrated, thereby, making it a real, breathing entity. Hindus believe that not just the Deity but the temple premises itself are sacred to Hindus since Hindus hold the faith that the entire Temple space is an amalgamation of the divine energy of the deity. Not only the Temple but the Temple premises in its entirety are considered sacred by Hindus. In several cases, the premises of the Temple and/or religious centre are illicitly taken over by institutions belonging to other faiths – like the Waqf board or the Church. Other times, the temple property, land or the property of religious centres are illicitly encroached by non-Hindu groups. Any illicit takeover or encroachment is a crime an initio; however, when non-Hindu groups illicitly take over or encroach the sacred land of Hindus, it is an affront to the Hindu community and is therefore classified as a religiously motivated hate crime under this category. This case was included in the Hinduphobia Tracker because the temple priest and Hindu devotees were deliberately targeted while practising their faith. The abuse, threats, and repeated obstruction were directed specifically at Hindu worship and were intended to stop the performance of pooja at the temple. The conduct was therefore not an ordinary neighbourhood dispute but a sustained attempt to interfere with the religious rights of Hindus because of their faith. At the outset, the repeated death threats issued to the temple priest were designed to intimidate him into abandoning his religious duties. A priest occupies a central role in the functioning of a temple, and threatening him served a wider purpose than targeting an individual. It was intended to disrupt the continuity of worship itself by creating fear of performing Hindu religious rituals. Such intimidation directly attacks the collective right of Hindus to practise their faith freely. Further, the repeated abuse of the priest and devotees while they were engaged in pooja demonstrated that the objection was not to any personal conduct but to Hindu worship itself. The perpetrators deliberately sought to discourage the practice of Hindu rituals by targeting a religious ceremony itself. By claiming that the pooja had caused their children to fall ill and insisting that it should not be performed, they attempted to undermine the community's faith in its religious traditions and prevent Hindus from freely practising their religion. Ultimately, the perpetrators sought to erode the community's faith in Hinduism by portraying a Hindu religious ritual as the cause of misfortune, thereby creating doubt and dissatisfaction with their own faith and discouraging its practice. At the same time, these statements implied the superiority of their own religious beliefs over Hinduism and sought to delegitimise Hindu worship in the eyes of devotees. Such conduct reflected hostility towards Hindu religious practices and revealed a deliberate intent to suppress the public practice of the Hindu faith. Moreover, the persistent creation of an unhygienic environment around the temple, intimidation of worshippers, and obstruction of access over several years demonstrated a calculated pattern of conduct rather than isolated acts of misconduct. These actions appeared designed to discourage devotees from visiting the temple, gradually weaken its religious activities, and facilitate continued encroachment on the temple premises. The sustained nature of the conduct reflected careful planning aimed at reducing the temple's ability to function as a place of Hindu worship. Temples are not merely physical structures but the spiritual and cultural centres of Hindu society. Attempts to prevent worship, intimidate priests, or gradually render temples unusable strike at the heart of Hindu religious life. In the present case, the deliberate obstruction of pooja and sustained intimidation of those associated with the temple reflected the same underlying objective of weakening Hindu religious practice by making the exercise of faith difficult, fearful, and unsustainable. Taken together, the threats, abuse, sustained obstruction of worship, and interference with the functioning of the temple revealed a deliberate and continuing attempt to prevent Hindus from freely practising their religion. The pattern of conduct extended beyond personal hostility and targeted the religious institution, its priest, and its devotees because they were engaged in Hindu worship. Such persistent efforts to disrupt religious observance reflect a mindset that views the public practice of Hinduism as something to be curtailed rather than respected. By repeatedly intimidating those associated with the temple and obstructing its activities, the perpetrators demonstrated hostility not merely towards individuals but towards the faith they represented. For these reasons, this case has been documented in the Hinduphobia Tracker as a religiously motivated hate crime. Disclaimer: It is important to clarify that the available sources do not specify the exact date on which the temple priest and Hindu devotees first began facing threats, abuse, and obstruction of worship. Although the priest stated that the harassment had continued for several years, no precise commencement date has been reported. Therefore, the Hinduphobia Tracker has recorded 11 July 2026, the date when the incident was reported by the media, as the incident date for documentation purposes. It is important to clarify that, although the incident affected multiple Hindu devotees in addition to the temple priest, the available media reports expressly identified only the priest, Nand Kishore Mali, by name. Therefore, the Hinduphobia Tracker has recorded the victim count as one for documentation purposes. Similarly, media reports indicated that multiple individuals participated in threatening the priest, abusing Hindu devotees, and obstructing worship; however, only Mohammad Guddu has been expressly identified by name. Therefore, the Hinduphobia Tracker has recorded the perpetrator count as one for documentation purposes.