Muslim youths of Jodhpur assault Bajrang Dal worker for praising 'The Kerala Story' on social media, threaten to behead him

Case ID : 529b30d | Location : Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India | Date of Incident : Sat, 6 May, 2023

Case ID : 529b30d

Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India

6 May, 2023

Muslim youths of Jodhpur assault Bajrang Dal worker for praising 'The Kerala Story' on social media, threaten to behead him

Attack not resulting in death

Attacked for opposing radicals or trying to save victim

Hate speech against Hindus

Violent threats

Case Summary

On July 5 2023, a 24-year-old man, associated with Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal, was assaulted in Jodhpur for sharing a positive status about the movie 'The Kerala Story' on WhatsApp. The victim, Abhishek Sargara, son of Raju Sargara, praised the film and suggested that every girl should watch it to stay safe from Islamic conversions. He was en route to his house when he was stopped and questioned by Pintu, Aman and Ali as he approached the main road leading to Merti Gate at Kali Tanki. The three individuals accused him of defaming their religion and threatened to behead him. Despite Abhishek explaining the harmless nature of his status, the assailants began assaulting him. VHP and Bajrang Dal members later demanded action against the attackers, emphasising the right to watch movies without facing violence for expressing opinions.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

This case has been added to the hate tracker under two prime categories. The first is- Attack not resulting in death. Under this, the sub-category chosen is- Attacked for opposing radicals/or trying to save victim from radicals. 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 second prime category within which this case has been placed is- Hate speech against Hindus. Under this, the sub-category selected is- Violent threats. Violent threats, explicit, implicit or implied, is the most dangerous form of hate speech since it goes beyond discriminatory and prejudicial language to express the intent of causing harm to an individual or a group of people based on their religious identity and faith. There could be several different kinds of threats that are issued to Hindus based on religious animosity. An explicit threat would mean the direct threat of violence towards an individual Hindu, a group of Hindus or Hindus at large. Physical violence, death threats, threats of destruction of property belonging to Hindus and threats of genocide would mean explicit threats against Hindus for their religious identity. Implicit threats may not be a direct threat but implied through the use of symbols of actions – for example – in the Nupur Sharma case, other than explicit threats, there were also implicit threats when Islamists took to the streets to burn and beat her effigies. It implies that they want to do the same to Nupur Sharma – thereby is considered an implicit threat. Violent threats can be delivered in person, through letters, phone calls, graffiti, or increasingly through social media and other online platforms. It would be important to understand that a threat – explicit or implicit, online or offline – to an individual who happens to be a Hindu does not qualify as a religiously motivated threat. Such a threat, while vile and dangerous, could be owing to non-religious reasons and/or personal animosity. To qualify as a religiously motivated threat, it would need to exhibit an indication that the individual is being targeted for religious reasons and/or owing to his/her religious identity as a Hindu. The assault on Abhishek Sargara in Jodhpur qualifies as a religiously motivated hate crime, as he was targeted for opposing religious radicalism by sharing a positive status about 'The Kerala Story'. The movie, 'The Kerala Story' depicts real-life incidents involving the forced religious conversion of Hindu and Christian women to Islam. The film focuses on how radical Islamist groups indoctrinate and coerce young women into converting to Islam, with the intention of recruiting them into extremist organizations like ISIS. It portrays the personal stories of women who were victims of 'love jihad', a phenomenon where Hindu girls are being trapped by Muslim men who later either forcefully convert them to Islam, push them into terrorism, groom them or murder and rape them. All these issues are very much real and pervasive in every nook and corner of the country. Here, the Muslim accused saw this as an affront to their religion and confronted Abhishek with violent threats, including calls for "Sar Tan Se Juda" (beheading). “Gustakh-e-Rasool ki Ek hi saza, sar tan se Juda, sar tan se Juda”, which translates to “There is only one punishment for being disrespectful to Rasool (Prophet Muhammad), their head separated from their torso, their head separated from the torso”, is an Islamist clarion call, that has become a staple feature of violent protests that have so far claimed the lives of at least 6 Hindus, including Kanhaiya Lal in Udaipur and Umesh Kolhe in Amravati, after Muslim fundamentalists, egged on by the dog-whistling of Alt News co-founder Mohammed Zubair against former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma, resorted to violence for what they perceived as ‘blasphemy’ against Prophet Muhammad. From Kanpur in India’s northern plains to the southern metropolis of Bengaluru, from Kolkata in the east to Hyderabad in the south, protests in the name of blasphemy have erupted in almost every corner of the country as Islamists took to the streets running amok and shouting “Sar Tan Se Juda” chants over the perceived belief of blasphemy against the Prophet. Though a radical Muslim outfit in Pakistan coined the slogan, it has gained popularity among Islamists in regions beyond its geographical origins. Over the years, we have seen large crowds of Islamists chanting the “Sar Tan Se Juda” slogan, which is nothing but a direct incitement to violence, leading to murders committed in the name of blasphemy. The radicalised outcry is not merely a statement of disapproval; it is a call for the execution of an individual through beheading, based on their religious identity. When this slogan is raised, it sends a clear and terrifying message not just to the individual targeted but also to anyone else who might share similar views or dare to express them. This tactic of intimidation aims to silence dissent and suppress freedom of expression, particularly in religious discourse. It aims to instil fear in the broader community. Islamists use this tactic to settle personal scores with Hindu and Christian families by levelling fabricated charges of blasphemy against them, which causes outrage and paints a target behind them. The underlying hatred and animosity toward non-Muslims, especially Hindus, drive these false blasphemy accusations as a means to subjugate and victimise them. As a result, this case is classified as a religiously motivated hate crime and has been documented accordingly.