Minor Dalit boy commits suicide due to humiliation, media portrays as caste-based violence
Basti, Uttar Pradesh, India 
19 December, 2024
Case Summary
In Uttar Pradesh’s Basti district, a 17-year-old Dalit boy named Aditya died by suicide after being subjected to severe violence and humiliation at a birthday party. Four youths brutally assaulted him, stripped him, urinated on him, and recorded the incident on video. The attackers also forced him to lick his spit and threatened to make the video viral. Despite Aditya’s pleas to delete the video, they further humiliated him. Traumatised, he narrated the ordeal to his parents before taking his life by hanging himself. The incident led to widespread speculation, with many portraying it as caste-based violence. Media reports highlighted the victim’s Dalit identity but omitted the caste of the attackers, causing assumptions that the violence was motivated by caste discrimination. Washington Post columnist Rana Ayyub and others on social media echoed these claims, suggesting the perpetrators were upper-caste Hindus. However, Basti Police clarified that both the victim and the accused belonged to the Dalit community, dismissing the caste-based narrative. Superintendent of Police Gopal Krishan Choudhary stated that the victim and attackers knew each other, indicating the incident could stem from personal enmity rather than caste. The four accused were arrested, and the Station House Officer (SHO) was suspended following allegations of police inaction.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the prime category- Hate speech against Hindus and within this, the sub-category selected is- Anti Hindu subversion and prejudice. Under this, one tertiary category namely, 'Anti-Hindu fake news or downplaying', has also been selected. Hate speech is defined as any speech, gesture, conduct, writing, or display that is prejudicial against a specific individual and/or group of people, which is leading to or may lead to violence, prejudicial action or hate against that individual and/or group. Media plays a specific and overarching reach in perpetuating prejudicial attitudes towards a community owing to unfair, untrue coverage and/or misrepresentation/misinterpretation, selective coverage and/or omission of facts of/pertaining to issues affecting a specific religious group. This type of bias can dehumanise the victim group, making it easier for others to justify harmful actions against them, which aligns with the objectives of hate speech laws aimed at preventing such harm. It is often observed that the media takes a prejudicial stand against the Hindu community driven by their need to shield the aggressor community which happens to be a numeric minority, however, is the one perpetrating violence against Hindus. For example, the media is often quick to contextualise religiously motivated crimes against Hindus, omit or misrepresent facts that point towards religiously motivated hate crimes, justify and/or downplay religiously motivated hate crimes or simply present fake news to stereotype Hindus. Such media bias leads to the denial of persecution and is often used to dehumanise Hindus, leading to justification for violence against them. For example, the media covered several fake allegations of Hindus targeting Muslims and forcing them to chant Jai Shree Ram. Most of these cases were proved false and fabricated after police investigation. These fake news reports were subsequently never retracted or clarified. Such fake news led to the justification of violence and dehumanisation of Hindus based on the argument that since Hindus targeted Muslims and forced them to chant Jai Shree Ram, the dehumanisation of Hindus and violence against them was par for the course and merely a retaliation. Such media bias leads to prejudicial portrayal of Hindus and offers a justification for violence against them and therefore, is considered hate speech under this category. Media reports in this case highlighted the victim’s Dalit identity while deliberately omitting the caste of the attackers, leading to assumptions that the violence was rooted in caste discrimination. Foreign media outlets, including Washington Post columnist Rana Ayyub and others on social media, amplified these claims, suggesting that the perpetrators were upper-caste Hindus. This selective reporting and exclusion of crucial facts contributed to the propagation of a false narrative targeting Hindus. The caste of the perpetrators becomes irrelevant in this context because the media opportunistically leveraged the incident to push an "Upper caste vs Lower caste" narrative that vilifies Hindus as a community. By emphasising the victim’s Dalit identity while omitting the caste background of the accused, the portrayal misled audiences into believing that the crime was an example of systemic caste-based oppression within Hindu society. Such representation reflects an intentional effort to malign Hindus by perpetuating the stereotype that 'upper caste' Hindus are inherently oppressive toward marginalised groups. Fake news which aims to perpetuate the narrative that ‘upper caste’ Hindus are tyrannical towards disadvantaged sections of the Hindu society is essentially anti-Hindus in nature owing to the intention behind spreading disinformation of this nature. It is often claimed that even such disinformation cannot be term anti-Hindu in nature since both the purported victim and aggressor are from the Hindu community, however, the disinformation is spread with the specific intention of discrediting the Hindu society and their faith by branding it oppressive and tyrannical. The intent of spreading such disinformation is to signal that Sanatan Dharma itself is discriminatory in nature and that it is a faith that is only meant for the practice of a specific class of Hindus who are considered ‘upper caste’. Such a false narrative is perpetuated in order to discredit and delegitimise the faith and dehumanise its followers. The direct consequence of the creation of such false ‘atrocity literature’ is an increase in violence against specific sections of Hindus and, exertion of pressure on another section of Hindus to alienate themselves from their professed faith, as it seeks to convince them on how the faith itself discriminates against them. Since such narratives attack the core of the faith with the intention of delegitimization, dehumanization and alienation of Hindus, it is considered a hate crime against Hindus and the faith they profess.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Others
Perpetrators Range
Unknown
Perpetrators Gender
unknown
Sources 
