Hindu community targeted with ‘Sar Tan Se Juda’ and pro-Palestine slogans during Eid procession in Raebareli
Raebareli, Uttar Pradesh, India 
25 August, 2026
Case Summary
In Dalmau, Raebareli, Uttar Pradesh, the Hindu community was targeted by Muslims who publicly raised the Islamic beheading slogan “Sar Tan Se Juda”. The slogans were raised on 26 August 2026 during a Barawafat (Eid Milad-ul-Nabi) procession. The Muslim participants also raised the pro-Palestine slogan “Palestine Zindabad”. According to media reports, the violent slogans were raised in the presence of police and administrative officials. A complaint was filed by Outpost In-charge Sonu Patel, who stated that the Muslim participants raised the slogan “Gustakh-e-Nabi ki ek hi saza, Sar Tan Se Juda” (Those who insult Prophet Mohammad, their necks shall be separated from their torso) during the procession. This raised concerns that the communal atmosphere could be disturbed. Police took action against a Muslim man named Afzal Qureshi for raising the slogans. While the initial report stated that Qureshi had been arrested, police also issued a challan against him for disturbing the peace. Circle Officer Girja Shankar Tripathi stated that action had been taken in connection with the sloganeering and that an investigation was underway, with further action to follow based on its findings. Hindu organisations expressed outrage over the incident and questioned why action had been taken against only one Muslim man when more than a dozen Muslims were involved in the sloganeering. They also questioned how such slogans were raised despite the presence of police and administrative officials. Residents demanded better functioning of the Peace Committee (a local body formed to promote coordination and communal harmony during festivals), with broader participation by local residents and responsible representatives from all communities in meetings held before religious events. They also called for effective police monitoring and videography during processions to ensure prompt action against objectionable slogans and attempts to disturb communal harmony. They stated that previous Peace Committee meetings had become a mere formality, as only a select few people were invited. According to the residents, this prevented police and administrative guidelines from being properly communicated to the wider public and contributed to disputes during religious events.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category- 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. This case has been added to the hate crime database because the use of the slogan “Sar Tan Se Juda” constitutes an explicit and religiously motivated threat directed at Hindus. “Gustakh-e-Rasool/Nabi ki Ek hi saza, sar tan se Juda, sar tan se Juda”, which translates to “There is only one punishment for being disrespectful to Rasool (Prophet Muhammad), their head separated from their torso, their head separated from the torso”, is an Islamist clarion call, that has become a staple feature of violent protests that have so far claimed the lives of at least 6 Hindus, including Kanhaiya Lal in Udaipur and Umesh Kolhe in Amravati, after Muslim fundamentalists, egged on by the dog-whistling of Alt News co-founder Mohammed Zubair against former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma, resorted to violence for what they perceived as ‘blasphemy’ against Prophet Muhammad. From Kanpur in India’s northern plains to the southern metropolis of Bengaluru, from Kolkata in the east to Hyderabad in the south, protests in the name of blasphemy have erupted in almost every corner of the country as Islamists took to the streets, running amok and shouting “Sar Tan Se Juda” chants over the perceived belief of blasphemy against the Prophet. Though a radical Muslim outfit in Pakistan coined the slogan, it has gained popularity among Muslims in regions beyond its geographical origins. Over the years, we have seen large crowds of Muslims chanting the “Sar Tan Se Juda” slogan, which is nothing but a direct incitement to violence, leading to murders committed in the name of blasphemy. The radicalised outcry is not merely a statement of disapproval; it is a call for the execution of an individual through beheading, based on their religious identity. When this slogan is raised, it sends a clear and terrifying message not just to the individual targeted but also to anyone else who might share similar views or dare to express them. This tactic of intimidation aims to silence dissent and suppress freedom of expression, particularly in religious discourse. It aims to instil fear in the broader Hindu community. Muslim extremists use this tactic to settle personal scores with non-Muslims, particularly Hindus, by levelling fabricated charges of blasphemy against them, which causes outrage and paints a target on them. The underlying hatred and animosity toward non-Muslims, especially Hindus, drive these false blasphemy accusations as a means to subjugate and victimise them. In the present case, Muslim participants raised “Gustakh-e-Nabi ki ek hi saza, Sar Tan Se Juda” during a Barawafat (Eid Milad-ul-Nabi) procession in Dalmau, Raebareli. The slogan was raised publicly during the procession, despite the presence of police and administrative officials. Participants also raised the pro-Palestine slogan “Palestine Zindabad”. Chanting such a deeply provocative beheading slogan during a religious procession in a public space is a targeted act of intimidation aimed at instilling fear within the majority public, which is the Hindu community. Given the established precedent of this slogan being followed by acts of brutal violence and beheadings of Hindus in the past, its use in a public setting represents not merely a verbal provocation but a direct call to violence and communal hostility. The deliberate chanting of this slogan during the procession underscores its threatening and provocative nature. Another point to highlight is that the Muslim participants also raised the pro-Palestine slogan “Palestine Zindabad”. It may be said that raising the pro-Palestine slogan can be considered pro-Palestine, but not anti-Hindu. However, such expressions do not only show pro-Palestine sentiments, but can also reflect anti-Hindu sentiments in the broader ideological context. It is pertinent to note that Muslim extremists harbour specific animosity towards Hindus and their faith and also view India as a Hindu collectivity. The very basis of the partition of India was that the Muslims believed that Islam was a nation unto itself, which could not survive with a Hindu collectivity like India. Further, this would also mean that raising pro-Palestine slogans is about hailing a Muslim collectivity and an expression of transnational loyalty and anti-Hindu sentiments. For that reason, any act which expresses transnational loyalty and faith in the Ummah is an act against Hindus and the Hindu collectivity. Such expressions of transnational unity are a direct demonstration of hostility towards India and, by extension, Hindus. In this case, when viewed alongside the chanting of the violent “Sar Tan Se Juda” slogan during the same religious procession, the pro-Palestine sloganeering further contributed to the communal and threatening nature of the incident. What makes this particularly alarming is that the incident occurred during Eid Milad-un-Nabi, a festival meant to commemorate the birth of Prophet Muhammad and promote spiritual reflection, compassion and unity. Instead, Muslim participants used the public procession to collectively raise the violent “Sar Tan Se Juda” slogan alongside “Palestine Zindabad”. With no provocation from the Hindu community, the chanting of an Islamic supremacist slogan associated with beheading and previous acts of violence against Hindus created an atmosphere of religious intimidation. By publicly raising such violent slogans, the participants demonstrated their deep-seated hostility towards Hindus and Hinduism and showcased an attempt to impose religious dominance and intimidate the Hindu community. This is not an isolated incident. This is also not the first time that the “Sar Tan Se Juda” slogan has been publicly raised by Muslims in a manner that threatens and intimidates Hindus. The Hinduphobia Tracker has documented nearly 69 such incidents between 1 January 2023 and 27 August 2026 in which the slogan was raised to target Hindus, issue violent threats or create an atmosphere of fear and religious intimidation. The repeated use of this slogan across different parts of the country demonstrates that its invocation is not merely an isolated act of religious expression but a recurring pattern of violent intimidation directed at the Hindu community. Overall, since this case meets the parameters of a religiously driven offence, it has been added to the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker. Disclaimer: In this case, although multiple Muslims raised the violent slogan, media reports identified only one perpetrator who was arrested in connection with the incident. However, Hindu activists stated that more than a dozen Muslims had participated in the sloganeering. Hence, taking both accounts into consideration, an indicative perpetrator count of 13 has been recorded for documentation purposes only.
Case Status
Case sub-judice
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
From 10 to 100
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
