Attack on Hindu sentiments: Christian man makes objectionable remarks about Ganesh Chaturthi prasad on social media
Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India 
30 September, 2026
Case Summary
In Raipur, Chhattisgarh, a Christian man named Calvin Samuel made objectionable remarks about the prasad offered and puja materials used during a Ganesh Chaturthi celebration. Samuel shared the remarks through an audio clip in the official WhatsApp group of Park Side Residential Colony in the Khamhardih area. Following this, members of the colony's Ganesh Committee filed a complaint with the police. According to the committee members, a Ganesh idol had been installed at the colony for the Ganesh festival, along with puja and a bhandara. An audio clip related to the event was subsequently shared in the society's official WhatsApp group by Calvin Samuel, a resident of the colony. The audio contained derogatory and objectionable remarks concerning the prasad and puja materials. Following the remarks, the committee members submitted the audio clip and the comments made by Samuel along with their complaint to Khamhardih police. They requested an investigation into the remarks, including the context in which the audio was made, who shared it and the actual intent behind the comments. The Puja committee members also sought action against the concerned person under provisions relating to hurting religious sentiments. The committee members expressed dissatisfaction over the lack of concrete action against Samuel after the complaint was filed and said they had approached senior officials regarding the matter. Khamhardih police confirmed receipt of the complaint and said the committee had submitted the WhatsApp audio along with it. Khamhardih Police Station Officer Bhavesh Gautam claimed that there was also an old dispute between the two parties. He said the matter was under investigation and further action would be taken after the investigation. Notably, the Hinduphobia Tracker team contacted Khamhardih Police Station Officer Bhavesh Gautam regarding the incident. He confirmed that the incident had occurred and that the accused had made objectionable remarks about the Prasad offered during Ganesh Chaturthi on social media. He also stated that the accused had apologised for his remarks. However, at the time of documentation, he did not disclose whether any legal action had been taken or was being initiated against the accused following the apology.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case is being added to the tracker under the primary category: Hate Speech against Hindus. The subcategory selected 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 this term 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 where 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 use 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 out of 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. This case was a clear example of a religiously driven hate crime because the accused made derogatory remarks against the prasad and puja-related items used during Ganesh Chaturthi. The remarks targeted objects and offerings that formed part of a Hindu religious observance, thereby demonstrating hostility towards Hindu religious practices and beliefs. Ganesh Chaturthi is a major Hindu festival dedicated to the worship of Lord Ganesha and is marked by the installation of Ganesha idols, prayers, rituals and offerings. Prasad offered during the puja holds particular religious significance for devotees, as it consists of food that is first offered to the deity and is then received and consumed as a sacred blessing. Bhandara, in which food is prepared and distributed among devotees and members of the community, is also an important aspect of religious and community participation during such celebrations. The puja-related items used during the festival, including the materials and offerings involved in worship, are similarly associated with the observance of Hindu religious rituals. Making derogatory remarks against prasad and other sacred items used in Hindu worship demonstrated religious hostility towards Hinduism and its practices. Prasad is not merely ordinary food when offered during puja; it carries religious and devotional significance for Hindu devotees. Targeting such an offering and the materials associated with worship therefore amounted to disparagement of objects central to Hindu religious practice. Such remarks demonstrated disdain towards Hindu religious beliefs and the Hindu community that revered these practices, making the incident a clear case of a religiously driven hate crime. The fact that the remarks were made in a community WhatsApp group further reinforced the religiously hostile nature of the incident. The accused did not make the remarks in a private or unrelated setting; they were shared through the society's official WhatsApp group, where members of the community could view them. Making such remarks about Hindu religious prasad and puja materials in a shared community forum had the effect of directly offending and outraging the religious sentiments of Hindu members of the community. The public nature of the remarks within the community setting therefore further demonstrated the religious hostility underlying the incident. These remarks showcased the perpetrator’s doctrinal hostility towards the Hindu faith, rooted in Christian theology’s monotheistic belief that only one God is to be worshipped and other deities rejected. From this standpoint, Hinduism as a polytheistic faith, along with the worship and offerings made to Hindu deities, is considered incompatible with Christian belief and, within doctrinal interpretations, heretical or Satanic. While the perpetrator had the right to practise his own faith, his public remarks about prasad offered during Ganesh Chaturthi went beyond practising monotheism and directly denigrated a sacred Hindu offering, thereby hurting Hindu religious sentiments. The fact that the perpetrator subsequently apologised did not negate the offence committed by denigrating sacred prasad and other Hindu religious offerings. His apology did not erase the religious hostility demonstrated through the remarks or change the fact that a sacred Hindu practice had been targeted. Therefore, the subsequent apology did not negate the religiously hostile nature of his conduct or the basis for documenting the incident as a religiously motivated act. Overall, the case met the parameters of a hate crime, as the conduct specifically targeted Hindu religious practices and objects of religious significance. Therefore, the incident was added to the Hinduphobia Tracker's hate crime database. Disclaimer: A copy of the police complaint was published in media reports, but the document was partially blurred and not fully legible. However, the date of the incident, 1st October 2026, was visible in the complaint. Therefore, 1st October 2026 was recorded as the incident date for documentation purposes.
Case Status
Complaint filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Christian Extremists
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
