Hindu auto-rickshaw driver targeted for displaying 'Jai Shri Ram' and Hindu quotes on his auto, faces harassment by Muslim man and police pressure
Hyderabad, Telangana, India 
12 July, 2026
Case Summary
In Hyderabad, Telangana, a Hindu auto-rickshaw driver named Bharat was aggressively targeted and harassed by a Muslim man over a message displayed on the rear of his auto that read, "Anyone born on this earth is a Hindu. Jai Shri Ram. Changing your religion is like changing your father." During the harsh interaction, the Muslim perpetrator repeatedly questioned the Hindu driver about the message and challenged him over its meaning while recording the exchange. The Muslim man told the driver to refrain from displaying such messages, claiming that Hyderabad was a communally harmonious city. Defending his right to express his religious beliefs on his own vehicle, the driver responded that it was his auto and that he was free to write what he wished. The Hindu driver stated that the message was not against any other faith; rather, it was a philosophical belief rooted in Hindu thought. Following this exchange, the Muslim man filed a complaint against the Hindu driver at the Attapur Police Station, seeking action over the display of the message. According to the victim, the sub-inspector, instead of acting against the Muslim men who heckled him, called him up and warned him to remove the quote. When the Hindu man refused the officer's demands, the SI threatened him with legal action. The incident prompted members of Hindu organisations to gather in support of the driver, stating that the message reflected a Hindu philosophical concept and did not target or insult any religious community. The episode subsequently became the subject of widespread public discussion on religious expression and the display of religious messages in public spaces.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The primary category for this case is: Attack not resulting in death. The selected subcategory for this case 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 the 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 primary category selected here is: Restriction/ban on Hindu practices, and within this, the subcategory selected is: Restriction on expression of Hindu identity. An example of the state-affected prejudicial and targeted orders against the Hindu community would be a government denying the right of a Hindu or a group of Hindus to hold a religious procession owing to the animosity of non-Hindu groups. Denial of the religious right of the Hindus to assuage the non-Hindu group which harbours animosity to a point where it could lead to violence against Hindus is not only a failure of law and order but is a prejudicial order against Hindus, denying them their fundamental rights to express their religious identity. An example of a hate crime against Hindus by a non-Hindu would be a non-Hindu institution forcing its Hindu employees to abandon religious symbols that a Hindu would wear as an expression of faith owing to inherent prejudice against the faith professed by the victim or a non-Hindu group of people restricting a Hindu group from constructing a place of worship simply because the demography of the area in which the temple is being built is dominated by non-Hindus. Such actions are driven by religious animosity and/or prejudice against Hindus and their faith and would therefore be categorised as a hate crime. The targeting of the Hindu auto-rickshaw driver was not triggered by any act of provocation or abuse directed at another community, but by his public expression of his Hindu faith. The message displayed on his vehicle conveyed a Hindu philosophical belief and concluded with the slogan "Jai Shri Ram", a phrase that holds deep significance in Hinduism. Whether one agrees with the sentiment or not, the objection raised by the Muslim complainant was not to any act of violence or incitement but to the very public display of a Hindu religious message. By repeatedly confronting the driver, heckling him, recording him, and seeking police intervention against him, the accused attempted to discourage and suppress the visible expression of his Hindu identity in a public space. The conduct of the Muslim man reflects a mindset that viewed the open assertion of Hindu beliefs as unacceptable. His actions sought to intimidate a Hindu into removing a public expression of his faith. Such conduct contributes to an environment where Hindus are discouraged from openly displaying their religious identity for fear of harassment or legal repercussions. Equally significant is the response attributed to the police. According to the victim, instead of taking action against those who had confronted and harassed him, the sub-inspector directed his attention towards the Hindu driver himself, asking him to remove the message and threatening legal action when he refused. This response from a public servant reflects a troubling institutional bias where maintaining "communal harmony" effectively meant restricting the religious expression of the Hindu victim rather than addressing the conduct of those attempting to suppress it. The incident also demonstrates a broader pattern documented by the Hinduphobia Tracker, where visible expressions of Hindu identity, whether through religious symbols, slogans, attire, or devotional messages, become the subject of organised objections and pressure campaigns. Instead of protecting the individual's right to peacefully express his religious beliefs, the focus shifts towards persuading or compelling the Hindu individual to remove those expressions in order to satisfy those objecting to them. This creates a chilling effect on the public practice of Hinduism by signalling that openly displaying one's faith may invite harassment or official pressure. Taken together, the conduct of the Muslim complainant and the response of the police reveal a pattern in which a Hindu individual was targeted not because he had attacked another community but because he openly displayed a message reflecting his religious beliefs. The attempt to silence that expression through intimidation and the threat of legal action demonstrates hostility towards the public manifestation of Hindu identity. There could be no other reason than an inherent animosity against Hinduism that led the Muslim man and the police officer to such conduct. Since disrespect for the Hindu religion is the primary purpose behind this incident, this case has been added to the tracker.
Victim Details
Total Victim
1
Deceased
0
Gender
- Male 1
- Female 0
- Third Gender 0
- Unknown 0
Caste
- SC/ST 0
- OBC 0
- General 0
- Unknown 1
Age Group
- Minor 0
- Adult 1
- Senior Citizen 0
- Unknown 0
Case Status
Complaint not filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
From 2 To 5
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
