Deceased Hindu youth's uncle and key witness attacked in Delhi, threatened to stay away from Tarun's murder trial

Case ID : 30aa969 | Location : Delhi, Delhi, India | Date of Incident : Sun, 27 September, 2026

Case ID : 30aa969

Delhi, Delhi, India

27 September, 2026

Deceased Hindu youth's uncle and key witness attacked in Delhi, threatened to stay away from Tarun's murder trial

Attack not resulting in death

Attacked for opposing radicals or trying to save victim

Case Summary

Only a few months after 26-year-old Hindu man Tarun, a resident of Delhi’s Uttam Nagar, was brutally killed during Holi celebrations, his uncle and key witness in the murder case, Tekram Khatik, was ambushed and assaulted outside his home in Hastsal, Uttam Nagar. Two men attacked him and threatened him with consequences if he did not withdraw his testimony. Tekram Khatik, or Tek Chand, was outside his home at approximately 10:30 pm on the night of 28th September 2026, when two young men confronted him. The attackers subjected him to a physical assault, inflicting injuries to his face and body. During the assault, the men warned him to withdraw from the legal proceedings, explicitly citing an upcoming Juvenile Justice Board hearing concerning the determination of the primary accused's age. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate had previously rejected a 2011 birth certificate presented by the defence that sought to classify the primary accused as a minor. Following the assault, police took Tekram Khatik to a local hospital for medical examination and treatment. The victim's prosecution counsel, Sumit Chauhan, noted that the attack occurred despite existing High Court directives mandating police protection for Tarun's family and witnesses, and called for immediate enforcement of security measures to prevent further intimidation. Tekram Khatik stated that one of the men who attacked him is the brother of an accused who had already been cleared and released by the court in Tarun's murder case. A video shared on social media platform X by the handle Treeni stated that the assault was carried out by members of the same group involved in the earlier killing, naming Imran, an accused who was recently released on bail, as having led the assault and pelted stones to trigger a local disturbance, prompting police deployment to the area. In a similar video statement circulated by Treeni, Tekram Khatik recounted the sequence of the assault outside his house. He said he was standing near his residence when an individual named Golu, accompanied by another worker, approached him and started an argument. During the confrontation, Golu struck him behind the ear while threatening him regarding his upcoming court testimony. Tekram Khatik stated that the assailants warned him that his witness statements were due to begin and demanded that he withdraw all testimony against them, threatening that none of his family members would be spared if he deposed in court. He further stated that the attackers demanded the withdrawal of the legal proceedings regarding the age verification of co-accused Faizal, specifically challenging the defence's claim that he was a juvenile, referencing that an associate, Bunty alias Faizan, had earlier been in custody. Tekram Khatik added that the assailants beat him severely until he lost consciousness on the street. The ongoing trial stems from the killing of twenty-six-year-old Tarun in the Hastsal Resettlement Colony during the festival of Holi. The dispute began when an eleven-year-old girl from Tarun's family threw a water balloon from their rooftop toward her father on the street below. The balloon missed and splashed water onto a Muslim woman from a neighbouring household. Although the girl's family offered an immediate apology, the woman rejected it and summoned her relatives, sparking a verbal altercation between the households. About an hour later, as Tarun returned home on a motorcycle with a friend, a group of fifteen to twenty individuals blocked his path. The mob attacked Tarun with iron rods, bricks, and stones, and dropped a large stone onto his chest while he lay injured on the road. The assailants also forced their way into the family's residence and vandalised household property. Tarun was transported to a hospital, where he succumbed to his injuries during treatment. Police subsequently arrested four individuals and detained one minor in connection with the fatal assault. Notably, this was not the first time Tarun's family has been targeted. Hinduphobia Tracker documented how, after the brutal killing of the Hindu youth, a Muslim mob attacked his family members. Their house was broken into and they were abused with casteist slurs. The relatives of the accused had also threatened Tarun's family with death.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

The primary category selected here is - Attack not resulting in death. Within it, the sub-category 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. The physical assault and intimidation of Tekram Khatik directly targeted his role as the primary eyewitness pursuing legal accountability for a communal killing. By standing firm as a witness and opposing efforts to classify an accused party as a juvenile, he actively resisted attempts to shield the accused from full statutory trial. The violence was an explicit retaliatory strike meant to punish him for pursuing justice through formal institutions. The primary religious marker in this assault was the coercive demand for absolute capitulation: the assailants ordered the total withdrawal of witness statements and the abandonment of the age-dispute challenge before the Juvenile Justice Board. The attackers issued explicit warnings that the entire family would be eliminated if testimonies proceeded. The violence served purely as an instrument to strip a vulnerable family of legal recourse and force their compliance. Furthermore, the assault demonstrated a deliberate attempt to enforce local dominance and ensure impunity for communal offences. By ambushing the key witness outside his own home and issuing direct threats ahead of scheduled proceedings, the assailants sought to create an atmosphere of terror that would suppress testimony, disrupt the judicial process, and establish that targeting members of the victim's community carries no legal consequences. Since it fits all the parameters, it is classified as a religiously motivated hate crime.