Case Summary

In Amethi, Uttar Pradesh, Hindus were forcibly stopped from playing bhajans (devotional Hindu prayers) during Durga Puja, a revered Hindu festival. Members of the Muslim community shut down the loudspeakers being used at a Durga Puja pandal situated near a mosque. According to media reports, the incident took place on Isoli Road in the Musafirkhana police station area, where the Vaishno Mata Puja pandal was located adjacent to the Jama Masjid. Whenever prayers were held at the mosque, the Maulana (Islamic cleric) and his Muslim associates repeatedly switched off the loudspeakers at the pandal by force. This had been happening for several days, leading to growing anger among Hindu devotees. Distressed by the repeated disruptions, members of the Durga Puja committee visited the tehsil office and submitted a memorandum to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM), demanding immediate action. The delegation, led by BJP District Minister Atul Singh and the Chairman of the Central Durga Puja Management Committee, met SDM Abhinav Kanaujia and pressed for administrative intervention to ensure the protection of Hindu religious rights. BJP leader Atul Singh stated that Hindus observe Navratri (Durga Puja) for nine days to worship Maa Durga, while Muslims offer prayers throughout the year without any interference. He condemned the disruption of Hindu festivals by such actions and warned that if the Amethi administration failed to take action within 24 hours, the Hindu community would be compelled to carry out a protest.

Case Images

Why it is Hate Crime ?

This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category- Restriction/ban on Hindu practices. The subcategory selected is- Restriction on expression of Hindu identity. An example of the state-affected prejudicial and targeted orders against the Hindu community would be a government denying the right of a Hindu or a group of Hindus to hold a religious procession owing to the animosity of non-Hindu groups. Denial of the religious right of the Hindus to assuage the non-Hindu group which harbours animosity to a point where it could lead to violence against Hindus is not only a failure of law and order but is a prejudicial order against Hindus, denying them their fundamental rights to express their religious identity. An example of a hate crime against Hindus by a non-Hindu would be a non-Hindu institution forcing its Hindu employees to abandon religious symbols that a Hindu would wear as an expression of faith owing to inherent prejudice against the faith professed by the victim or a non-Hindu group of people restricting a Hindu group from constructing a place of worship simply because the demography of the area in which the temple is being built is dominated by non-Hindus. Such actions are driven by religious animosity and/or prejudice against Hindus and their faith and would therefore be categorized as a hate crime. Another primary category selected is- Attack on Hindu religious representations. Within this, the subcategory selected is- Breaking rules of place of worship. Sanatan Dharma is not a religion of one book, which is to say that while it has religious scriptures that form the central tenets of the faith, there are several traditions followed through thousands of years, mostly passed from generation to generation orally. One of these oral traditions or written traditions is the rules of specific temples. Certain temples have rules which are traditional rules, dependent on the worship of the presiding deities. These rules and traditions have been followed for thousands of years whether they find scriptural mention or not. Such traditions are based on the nature and rules of worship of the presiding deity of that temple. Any non-compliance of these traditions owing to animosity towards the faith or for the sake of activism stems not only from the lack of faith in the presiding deity but also disregard for the faith of the devotees of that deity/temple and implicit bias against the faith, the tradition and the deity itself. Since these specific traditions are central to the faith of the devotees of that specific temple and presiding deity, any non-compliance with these traditional rules would be considered a religiously motivated hate crime. Another primary category selected is- Attack not resulting in death. The subcategory selected is- Attacked for crossing 'Muslim Area'. One of the reasons that Hindus get attacked unprovoked specifically by Islamists is for crossing ‘Muslim areas’. Essentially, Muslim mobs often attack Hindus crossing or present in certain areas which have a majority Muslim population. It has often been cited as one of the reasons to blame Hindus for attacks against themselves, signalling that Hindus displaying religious symbols, taking our religious processions or crossing any area which is dominated by Muslim residents is a provocation in and of itself. These areas are mostly ghettoized areas where mobs mobilize quickly to attack Hindus for a variety of reasons like playing music during a religious procession, crossing a mosque, wearing a tilak or any other religious symbol in a Muslim-dominated area, praying at a local temple in that area etc. There have been cases where the few local Hindus of that area have been attacked on their way to the Temple for prayers as well, simply because the area is considered a Muslim-dominated area. Several times, it is entirely possible that the immediate trigger for the violence against Hindus was non-religious in nature, however, the violence became religiously motivated in nature because the area was Muslim dominated and the residents on the whole harboured animosity towards Hindus, evidenced from the actions of the mob, the slogans, and the nature of the attack. Such crimes are motivated by the religious identity of the victims and are therefore classified as hate crimes under this category. In this case, the act of stopping bhajans inside a Hindu pandal during one of the most revered Hindu festivals, Durga Puja, was a direct restriction on Hindu identity and religious expression. Hindus were prevented from publicly expressing their devotion to Goddess Durga during celebrations in a space dedicated to their faith. This act not only suppressed Hindu religious expression but also symbolised deep-seated hostility towards Hindu religious and cultural identity. Such restrictions foster an atmosphere of religious intimidation, heighten the sense of vulnerability among Hindus, and signal that their beliefs and practices are unwelcome or illegitimate in certain spaces. In effect, it was an attempt to limit and marginalise the public visibility of the Hindu faith. This incident occurred during Durga Puja, one of the most sacred and culturally significant festivals for Hindus. Targeting Hindus for playing devotional songs during their festival was a calculated act of disruption. The interference took place at a Durga Pandal, where devotees were intimidated, and their prayers were stopped at a moment of spiritual celebration. This act demonstrated clear religious hostility, aimed not only at silencing expressions of Hindu devotion but also at undermining the sanctity of the festival and violating the sacred atmosphere and rules of the pandal. Such deliberate intrusion during a revered occasion reflects entrenched animosity towards the Hindu faith. It is also significant to note that this incident took place in close proximity to a mosque. In many such locations, Muslims often refer to the surroundings as ‘Muslim areas’ and seek to exercise control over them under a misguided notion of religious ownership. In this case, the perpetrators treated the area near the mosque as an exclusive Muslim zone where non-Muslims, particularly Hindus, were unwelcome. This sense of entitlement and religious superiority reflects deep-seated prejudice and a clear attempt to assert Islamic dominance over public spaces. The forcible silencing of Hindu devotional music was rooted in an ideology of Islamic supremacy, where Muslims in the area viewed Hindus as subordinate and believed they had the authority to dictate whether the Hindu faith could be practised freely in that locality. This illustrates a dangerous mindset steeped in exclusion, intolerance, and religious hostility, making this case an unequivocal example of a religiously motivated hate crime. Such actions qualify as hate crimes against Hindus due to an ideological foundation shaped by Islamic doctrine, which often holds contempt for and dehumanises other faiths. Polytheistic religions such as Hinduism are particularly targeted, as they are viewed within this framework as illegitimate or inferior. This case exemplifies how religious indoctrination can strengthen hostility, leading to repeated acts of intimidation and suppression of Hindu practices, all underpinned by the belief that Islamic norms should override pluralistic religious expression. Given that this case meets all recognised parameters of a religiously motivated hate crime — targeted at a specific religious group, carried out during a sacred festival, rooted in hostility towards the faith, and part of a repeated pattern of similar offences — it is being entered into the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker. Disclaimer: Media reports stated that several Muslims entered the pandal to forcibly stop the playing of bhajans. The exact number of perpetrators was not specified, but one of the accused, a Maulana, was identified as leading the opposition against Hindu devotees. For the purposes of accurate reporting, the perpetrator count is conservatively recorded as ‘1’. The Hinduphobia Tracker records the date of an incident based on when the crime occurred rather than when it was reported in the media. However, media reports did not specify the exact date of occurrence, as they indicated that the forcible stoppage of bhajans had taken place multiple times and was a recurring issue. Therefore, the date on which the complaint was formally submitted to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate by members of the Hindu Durga Puja Committee and Hindu organisations—6th October 2025—has been used as the indicative date of the incident.