"Sanatan Dharma Murdabad": Anti-Hindu slogans raised by Ambedkarite organisation in Datia, Madhya Pradesh
Datia, Madhya Pradesh, India 
31 October, 2026
Case Summary
In Datia, Madhya Pradesh, an anti-Hindu slogan, ‘Sanatan Dharma Murdabad’ (Death to Hinduism), was raised by members of an Ambedkarite organisation named Bhim Army. The incident took place outside the Kotwali police station in Datia on 1 November 2026. The incident occurred amid an ongoing verbal dispute between a Hindu organisation named 'Sanatan Sena' and the Ambedkarite group Bhim Army. On 31 October 2026, members of the Sanatan Sena attempted to burn an effigy of the Bhim Army's state president. However, the police intervened and seized the effigy before it could be set alight. The following day, on 1 November 2026, Raja Badouni, a controversial figure associated with the Bhim Army, arrived at the Kotwali police station along with his Ambedkarite supporters. Ostensibly, he had come to submit a memorandum to the station in-charge (TI). However, after coming out of the police station, he and his supporters raised the slogan ‘Sanatan Dharma Murdabad’ at the main entrance. Raja Badouni also recorded videos of the sloganeering at the spot for social media and subsequently shared them through a Facebook account named ‘Raja Dharmesh’. In another video recorded near Jhansi Chungi, he issued a provocative challenge, declaring that his supporters stood united with their full strength and daring others to confront them. He also made threatening remarks. The sloganeering and provocative video recordings took place right outside the police station, where police personnel were present. Following the circulation of the videos on social media, the Kotwali police station in-charge stated that the footage was being examined and that appropriate legal action would be taken based on the findings. Reports also revealed that Raja Badouni had a criminal background and had previously faced stringent action under the National Security Act (NSA).
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The primary category selected in this case is: 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. The incident constituted a clear case of religiously driven hate speech, as members of the Ambedkarite organisation Bhim Army raised the anti-Hindu slogan ‘Sanatan Dharma Murdabad’ (Death to Hinduism). The slogan directly targeted the Hindu faith rather than expressing opposition to a particular organisation or individual. Hinduism, also known as Sanatan Dharma, is one of the world's oldest and largest living religious traditions, followed by millions of people across the world. It is not merely a set of religious beliefs but an integral part of the cultural, spiritual and civilisational identity of Hindus. Generations have grown up practising, preserving and revering their Hindu faith, its traditions, deities and sacred texts. Therefore, raising a slogan wishing for the death of Hinduism went beyond ordinary criticism or political disagreement. It expressed hostility towards an entire religious tradition and the millions of people who practised it. Calling for the death of a religion seeks to demean and delegitimise its very existence, reflecting deep-seated religious prejudice against both the faith and its followers. The context of the incident further highlighted this hostility. The dispute between the Hindu group Sanatan Sena and the Bhim Army had arisen after members of the Sanatan Sena attempted to burn an effigy of the Bhim Army's state president. Such protests and effigy-burning demonstrations against individuals associated with opposing organisations constitute forms of political expression and do not, in themselves, amount to hostility towards an entire religion. If the Bhim Army had grievances against the Sanatan Sena, it could have addressed them by challenging the organisation and its actions at a political or organisational level. Instead, its members chose to raise slogans against Sanatan Dharma itself. This shifted the confrontation from a disagreement between two political organisations to an attack on the religious identity of an entire community. The choice to target Hinduism rather than confine the protest to the organisation with which it had a dispute demonstrated the religious dimension of the hostility. The incident also needs to be examined against the broader pattern of anti-Hindu rhetoric and activities associated with individuals and organisations operating under the Ambedkarite ideological banner. While Ambedkarism presents itself as a movement advocating social justice and Dalit rights, several instances have involved individuals identifying with this ideology directing hostility towards Hinduism and Hindu religious practices under the pretext of opposing caste discrimination. Rather than limiting their criticism to caste-based discrimination and social practices, several Ambedkarite individuals and groups have resorted to derogatory remarks against Hindu deities, religious traditions and beliefs, issued threats against Hindus and engaged in acts of hostility targeting the Hindu community. Hinduphobia Tracker has documented 49 such cases between 1 January 2023 and 11 November 2026, involving individuals and organisations associated with the Ambedkarite movement. These incidents indicate a recurring pattern of targeting Hindu religious identity that extends beyond isolated political disagreements. It is particularly important to examine the Bhim Army's position in this context. Although the organisation 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. Similarly, on June 29, 2021, in Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh, a Hindu named Saurabh Sharma was attacked by Bhim Army members over political differences. The assailants used swords and rods, causing severe injuries, and threatened to eliminate the Brahmin community from the area. 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 visible during his active participation in the anti-CAA (Citizenship Amendment Act) protests that culminated in the Delhi anti-Hindu Riots 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. In the present incident, the Bhim Army members' decision to raise the slogan ‘Sanatan Dharma Murdabad’ instead of restricting their opposition to the Sanatan Sena demonstrated their hostility towards Hinduism and the Hindu community. Therefore, this case is being added to the hate crime database of the tracker. Disclaimer: Hinduphobia Tracker records the perpetrator count in this case as one, namely Raja Badouni, who was the only perpetrator identified by name. Although several other individuals participated in the sloganeering, their identities and the total number of perpetrators were not specified in the available reports. Therefore, a conservative estimate of one identified perpetrator has been adopted for documentation purposes only.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Others
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
