Revered deity Lord Shri Krishna mocked with obscene remarks by Ambedkarite man on sacred occasion of Janmashtami
Ambedkar Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, India 
3 September, 2026
Case Summary
In Ambedkar Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, Hindu deity Shri Krishna was targeted with obscene and objectionable remarks on the sacred occasion of Shri Krishna Janmashtami. The remarks were posted on a Facebook profile associated with an Ambedkarite youth named Indresh Bauddh. The post came to attention on 4 September 2026, prompting outrage among Hindu users on social media. The timing of the remarks was significant as they were made on Janmashtami, a major Hindu festival commemorating the birth of Bhagwan Shri Krishna. The obscene remarks were directed at the deity on a day when Hindus across the country were observing prayers, rituals, and celebrations dedicated to Shri Krishna, making the post a direct act of denigration of a revered Hindu deity and the religious occasion associated with him. The matter gained wider attention after Shishir Patel raised it on X, stating that Indresh Bauddh had posted highly obscene and objectionable comments about Shri Krishna and calling for strict action. He tagged Ambedkar Nagar Police and other authorities and urged Hindu users to amplify the matter until action was taken. Following the complaint and circulation of the post, Ambedkar Nagar Police stated that concerned officials had been directed to investigate the matter and take necessary action. Police subsequently confirmed that the youth linked to the objectionable Facebook post about Shri Krishna had been taken into custody and that further legal proceedings were underway.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The primary category selected for this case is: Hate speech against Hindus. The subcategory selected for this case 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 these terms 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 that 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 selected subcategory is: Subversion of scriptures. Subverting the religious scriptures of Hindus has particularly devastating consequences. Subversion of the scriptures of Hindus is often done to justify or promote hatred, discrimination, or violence against specific individuals or groups of Hindus. Religious scriptures are often nuanced, and those who harbour religious animosity towards Hindus often misquote or misrepresent the scripture to legitimise their animosity and hate towards the faith and its adherents. Any such misquoting of scriptures or subversion to justify hate, violence and discrimination against Hindus owing to religious animosity is hate speech and is categorised as such. This incident is recorded in the Hinduphobia Tracker because the conduct of Indresh Bauddh, identified as an Ambedkarite, reflected direct hostility and contempt towards a revered Hindu deity and the religious sentiments attached to him. The objectionable social-media remarks were not framed as a theological disagreement or criticism of a particular practice; they targeted Bhagwan Shri Krishna himself through obscene and derogatory expression, thereby attacking a central object of Hindu devotion. The clearest religious marker in the case was Lord Shri Krishna. Shri Krishna is one of the most revered deities in Hinduism and occupies a central place in Hindu theology, devotion and scripture. For Hindus, he is worshipped as an incarnation of Bhagwan Vishnu and as a divine figure associated with dharma, devotion, wisdom and the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita. Reducing such a sacred Hindu deity to the subject of obscene or insulting commentary strips him of his religious sanctity and turns an object of worship into an object of ridicule. The timing of the remarks on Janmashtami significantly heightened the incident's religious character. Janmashtami is the sacred Hindu festival commemorating the birth of Bhagwan Shri Krishna and is observed through fasting, prayer, temple worship, bhajans, devotional gatherings and celebrations centred specifically on him. Choosing this revered day itself to mock and target Shri Krishna made the insult especially pointed. The very occasion on which Hindus were celebrating and worshipping the deity was used to demean him, converting a sacred religious festival into an opportunity for derision. This aspect is particularly important because the insult was not incidental to the timing. The sacred occasion and the sacred figure were directly connected. Janmashtami derives its religious significance precisely from devotion to Shri Krishna. Targeting him on that day therefore intensified the affront to Hindu religious sentiments and demonstrated that the religious context was central to the expression rather than peripheral. Further, the nature of the post makes the religious targeting explicit. It described Shri Krishna as a “womaniser” and referred to him as having “10 illegitimate wives and 16,108 girlfriends.” The post did not seek to question or engage with Hindu scripture. It deliberately twisted a sacred Puranic narrative and recast it in crude, sexually derogatory terms to portray Lord Shri Krishna as a “womaniser.” The reference to 16,108 women is particularly significant because it distorted a recognised Puranic tradition. Hindu scriptures describe Shri Krishna as rescuing 16,108 women who had been held captive by Narakasura and accepting them so that they would not be subjected to social rejection because of their captivity. The post stripped this context entirely and recast the women as “girlfriends” and “illegitimate wives” in order to attach a degrading sexual characterisation to Shri Krishna. The insult therefore depended on misrepresenting a Hindu religious narrative and turning it into material for sexual ridicule. Taken together, the obscene targeting of Bhagwan Shri Krishna, the deliberate use of Janmashtami as the occasion for the remarks, and the reduction of a revered Hindu deity to an object of ridicule reflected clear animosity and contempt towards Hinduism and its forms of worship. The target was not an isolated social practice but the religious worldview, symbols and devotional behaviour through which Hindus practise and transmit their faith. For this reason, the case warrants inclusion in the tracker. It is also important to mention here that the accused was a member of the Bhim Army. While the Bhim Army presents itself as a champion of Dalit rights, its actions and affiliations often contradict this claim. Dalits are very much Hindus, yet the Bhim Army frequently targets Hindu symbols, festivals, and practices, including those held sacred by Dalits themselves. This pattern suggests that the organisation’s agenda is less about genuine Dalit upliftment and more aligned with broader anti-Hindu narratives that seek to divide and weaken Hindu society from within. This becomes particularly apparent when the Bhim Army aligns with leftist and Islamist platforms, where identity politics is weaponised against Hindus. In such spaces, the micro identities of caste, region, and language are secondary; what matters most is religious identity. It is the Hindu identity, regardless of caste, that often becomes the target of animosity. As seen in cases where Dalit families were attacked for displaying Hindu symbols or worshipping deities, the hostility stems not from caste differences, but from a disdain for Hindu religiosity. For example, on May 19, 2020, reports emerged in which a Dalit family in Bihar’s Kishanganj district accused the local Bhim Army unit of attacking them for their beliefs, desecrating a temple as they objected to their reverence for Hindu deities and saffron flags. Moreover, Bhim Army chief Chandrashekhar Azad has repeatedly made statements and taken positions that reflect his anti-Hindu stance. For instance, he has publicly endorsed conversion as a political weapon, invoking B.R. Ambedkar’s decision to leave Hinduism, and has actively supported movements that call for a rejection of Hindu festivals and practices. In fact, Chandrashekhar Azad's political trajectory has strongly focused on building a Dalit-Muslim alliance, a strategy that became particularly evident during his active participation in the anti-CAA (Citizenship Amendment Act) protests, which culminated in the Delhi anti-Hindu Riots of 2020. His brand of politics, under the banner of Dalit-Muslim unity, has contributed to narratives that vilify Hindu traditions and exacerbate targeted attacks against Hindus. Thus, by attacking Hindu symbols and aligning with forces hostile to Hinduism at large, the Bhim Army effectively turns against the cultural and spiritual traditions of the Dalit community itself. In doing so, it reinforces the very forces of division and religious antagonism that marginalise Dalits, not as a caste, but as Hindus. This contradiction reveals that, despite its stated mission, the Bhim Army’s trajectory increasingly serves an anti-Hindu, rather than a pro-Dalit, agenda. Similar cases involving Sanghmitra Baudh’s continuing pattern of denigrating and ridiculing Hinduism, Hindu deities, scriptures, religious beliefs and practices have also been documented by the Hinduphobia Tracker.
Case Status
Arrested
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Others
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
