Hindu lawyer arrested for merely opposing a Hindu child being forced to recite Islamic verses in Hyderabad school

Case ID : 30a99b1 | Location : Hyderabad, Telangana, India | Date of Incident : Wed, 15 July, 2026

Case ID : 30a99b1

Hyderabad, Telangana, India

15 July, 2026

Hindu lawyer arrested for merely opposing a Hindu child being forced to recite Islamic verses in Hyderabad school

Attack not resulting in death

Attacked for opposing radicals or trying to save victim

Case Summary

A Hindu advocate and Bharatiya Janata Party leader, K. Karuna Sagar, was arrested by Telangana Police after he protested outside a private school in Hyderabad's Saidabad area. The protest followed an incident in which a Hindu Class II student had been assigned Islamic prayers, including the Kalma and Surah Al-Fatiha, as homework. Sagar had demanded legal action against those responsible for assigning the Islamic prayers to the Hindu child. The controversy arose after the family of the six-year-old Hindu student objected to repeated homework entries instructing the minor child to learn and recite Islamic prayers. The incident prompted the parents to confront the school principal and teachers, stating that the child was being subjected to religious instruction contrary to his faith. The school initially stated that the homework had been intended only for Muslim students who had opted for Islamic religious studies. However, as the controversy escalated, the school acknowledged that a violation had occurred and terminated the services of the Muslim teacher, Shaikh Aisha Parveen, who was responsible for assigning the homework. Following the incident, the parents informed the police that they were satisfied with the action taken by the school management and did not wish to pursue the matter further. They also accepted the school's apology and requested that the teacher be allowed to continue working at the school, although the management had not taken a final decision regarding her future employment. Charminar Zone Deputy Commissioner of Police K. Kiran Prabhakar stated that, since no formal complaint had been submitted by the family, no First Information Report had been registered. He further stated that the institution had students and teachers from different religious backgrounds. Meanwhile, Bharatiya Janata Party leaders staged a protest outside the school, demanding police action over the incident. During the protest, Telangana Police detained several protesters, including advocate K. Karuna Sagar. Speaking after his arrest, Sagar stated that he had been arrested for questioning why no First Information Report had been registered despite what he described as the forced religious indoctrination of the Hindu student. He further stated that the law should be applied fairly and impartially, without fear or favour. Former Bharatiya Janata Party Member of the Legislative Assembly and current Independent Member of the Legislative Assembly T. Raja Singh also participated in the protest. A video of the protest was shared on X by Indian political commentator Mr Sinha. In the video, advocate K. Karuna Sagar stated that he had come to question the police over the absence of a First Information Report in the case. He said, "I've come here to question police and ask why no FIR. Our demand is to arrest the principal who is forcibly making innocent minds read Quran." Following this, Karuna Sagar was arrested after demanding legal action against the Muslim teacher whom he held responsible for assigning the Islamic prayers to the Hindu child. Following the controversy, officials from the Telangana Education Department visited the school to speak with the principal and teachers and to ascertain the circumstances surrounding the incident.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

The primary category selected in this case is- Attack not resulting in death. The subcategory selected 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. This case was classified as a religiously motivated hate crime because the arrest of the Hindu advocate stemmed directly from his efforts to seek legal action in response to an incident in which a minor Hindu student had been forced to learn and recite Islamic prayers at school. The child was instructed to memorise the Kalma and Surah Al-Fatiha despite belonging to a different faith, exposing him to religious practices that were contrary to his own Hindu beliefs. The assignment of Islamic religious prayers to a Hindu child constituted religious targeting, as it sought to introduce and normalise the teachings and practices of another religion to a minor without regard for his own religious identity. Such conduct undermined the child's right to receive an education free from religious coercion and represented an attempt to influence a Hindu child through compulsory religious instruction. For these reasons, the underlying incident involving the Hindu student was documented by the Hinduphobia Tracker as a religiously motivated hate crime. In this current case, the advocate's intervention was directly connected to this underlying act of religious targeting. By demanding the registration of a First Information Report and legal action against those responsible for assigning Islamic prayers to the Hindu child, he sought accountability for conduct that infringed upon the child's right to practise and preserve his own religion. His actions were aimed at protecting the Hindu student from religious indoctrination and ensuring that those responsible for compelling the child to learn and recite Islamic prayers were subjected to due legal process. There was no indication that the advocate had engaged in any unlawful conduct by seeking legal remedies or by peacefully demanding police action in relation to the incident. Instead of initiating legal proceedings against those involved in subjecting the Hindu child to compulsory Islamic religious instruction, Telangana Police arrested the advocate while he was demanding that the law be enforced. His arrest therefore did not arise from an unrelated dispute but was intrinsically linked to his efforts to secure accountability in a case involving the religious targeting of a Hindu child. The sequence of events demonstrated that action was taken against an individual who was attempting to protect the victim and pursue legal remedies rather than against those involved in committing the underlying act. This formed part of the chain of events that followed the religious targeting of the Hindu student and reinforced the connection between the advocate's arrest and the original incident. Hindu individuals who intervene to protect Hindu victims of religiously motivated targeting or seek justice on their behalf themselves become targets because of their opposition to such acts. In this case, the advocate's arrest followed his public demand for legal action against those responsible for compelling a Hindu child to learn and recite Islamic prayers. The arrest had the effect of discouraging and penalising efforts to seek accountability for an incident involving the religious targeting of a Hindu minor. Where those seeking legal redress for acts of religious targeting are themselves subjected to coercive state action arising directly from those efforts, the subsequent action becomes inseparable from the underlying hate crime and reflects a continuation of its impact. Since this case meets the parameters of a religiously driven crime, it is being documented in the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records incident dates based on when the victim's ordeal occurred, rather than when it was reported by the media. In this case, however, the exact date on which the incident occurred could not be ascertained from available sources. Accordingly, the date on which the incident was first reported in the media, 16 July 2026, has been recorded as the indicative incident date for documentation purposes only.