Anti-Hindu remarks made by former Chief Justice of India, claims all Hindu temples are built on top of Buddhist or Jain temples
India 
31 December, 2024
Case Summary
On 1st January 2025, Times Now’s editor Navika Kumar hosted a discussion with former Chief Justice of India and Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave, on the notion whether the Constitution of India and democracy are under threat. During the course of the discussion he passed anti Hindu remarks stating that all Hindu temples are built on top of Buddhist or Jain temples. To prove his point right, Dave quoted self-proclaimed historian Devdutt Pattanaik and claimed that Hindu temples were often built over Jain and Buddhist temples. The assertion was made while discussing religious and historical tensions because of petitions filed in different courts over conflicts arising in the matters of mosques built over by destroying Hindu temples and regarding the interpretation of the Places Of Worship Act 1991. Dave stated that the Temple-Mosque issue is mere distraction rather the people and the government should focus on modern problems like poverty and unemployment. However he promoted the Marxist propaganda as History, that all Hindu temples were built on top of Buddhist and Jain sites. Dushyant Dave said, “I have no doubt that every Islamic monument perhaps was built on a Hindu temple, but then every Hindu temple was built on a Jain temple or a Buddhist temple, as Devdutt Pattanaik rightly points out. Are we going to start digging all this? Should we dig up the Taj Mahal or Red Fort? We don’t need it. This country has a larger role to play in the world, which is being derailed by such distractions.” This propaganda of Hindu temples built on top of Jain and Buddhist sites was first given by Marxist historians like Romila Thapar in 1986, during Ram Janmabhoomi movement to dismiss the history of Islamic rulers demolishing Hindu temples and building mosques over them. These baseless claims was challenged by historian Sita Ram Goel. Sita Ram Goel sent a written questionnaire to historians like Romila asking for concrete evidences including Inscriptions. Hindu kings donated lands and offered state patronage to Jain and Buddhist shrines along with Hindu temples, and there is no evidence of Hindu kings destroying religious sites of Jains and Buddhists. Goel stated that these baseless claims are made against Hindus to portray them as bigoted, intolerant and communal.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the prime category of- Hate speech against Hindus. Under this, the first sub-category selected is- Subversion of scriptures. Subverting the religious scriptures of Hindus has particularly devastating consequences. Subversion of the scriptures of Hindus is often done to justify or promote hatred, discrimination, or violence against specific individuals or groups of Hindus. Religious scriptures are often nuanced and those who harbour religious animosity towards Hindus often misquote or misrepresent the scripture to legitimise their animosity and hate towards the faith and its adherents. Any such misquoting of scriptures or subversion to justify hate, violence and discrimination against Hindus owing to religious animosity is hate speech and is categorised as such. The second sub-category selected here is- Anti-Hindu subversion and prejudice. 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. The assertions made by former Chief Justice of India Dushyant Dave, claiming that Hindu temples were built on top of Jain and Buddhist temples, represent a baseless narrative rooted in Marxist propaganda rather than historical fact. This claim, often used to equate the destruction of Hindu temples by Islamic invaders with supposed acts of intolerance by Hindus, lacks any concrete evidence. Historians like Sita Ram Goel have debunked these assertions by highlighting the historical reality that Hindu rulers patronised Jain and Buddhist shrines alongside Hindu temples, providing land and support for their upkeep. There is no documented evidence, such as inscriptions or historical accounts, of Hindu kings destroying Jain or Buddhist places of worship. Instead, these claims were fabricated by Marxist historians like Romila Thapar in the 1980s to diminish the historical significance of Islamic iconoclasm and portray Hindus as equally intolerant. By endorsing such unfounded narratives, Dushyant Dave's remarks not only distort history but also amount to hate speech against Hindus under the guise of intellectual discourse. They perpetuate a false equivalence and vilify Hindus as communal and bigoted, subverting their religious and historical legacy. This undermines the respect for Hindu scriptures, culture, and heritage, fostering unnecessary animosity and misrepresentation in public discourse.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Others
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
