Case Summary

On social media, violent threats against the Hindu community were issued by a Muslim man from Assam known as ‘Sunny Miya Bhai’. In an Instagram video that went viral, he threatened to slaughter Hindus like cattle. The accused, identified as ‘Sunny Miya Bhai’ and operator of the Instagram handle ‘sunnybhai6908’, stated in his viral video that, “You people (Hindus) don’t know who the Miyas are, and we have no fear. Every year we celebrate Bakri Eid.” He went on to threaten the Hindu community by saying, “We will cut you like goats and cows, just like in Qurbani. Remember that.” Sunny Miya Bhai had 2,400 followers on Instagram. The video, threatening Hindus, received more than 44,000 likes. Following the incident, Hindu netizens on social media called for the Assam police to arrest the Muslim accused. The Kamrup police in Assam arrested Sanidul Islam (aka Sunny Miya Bhai) on June 6th, 2025. In a tweet, the police informed, “Kamrup Police has apprehended Sanidul Islam alias Sunny Bhai of Pathalipara, Boko, Kamrup, for posting communally offensive comments on Instagram. Necessary legal action is being initiated.” The development was also confirmed by Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma in a tweet on Friday (6th June).

Case Images

Why it is Hate Crime ?

This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category- Hate Speech against Hindus. The subcategory 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 other 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 first and most telling indicator that this is a hate crime is the nature and scope of the threat itself. The accused did not single out any individual Hindu for provocation or attack, nor did he claim to be responding to any personal grievance. Instead, he issued an open, violent threat against the entire Hindu community. This generalised targeting of an entire religious group reflects an inherent and pre-existing animosity, not a reaction to a specific event. In hate crimes, the core motive lies in hostility towards the victim’s identity and, in this case, the Hindu faith, rather than any individual action. By stating “we will cut you like goats and cows,” the Muslim social media influencer was not settling a personal score or reacting to provocation; rather, he was expressing blanket hatred towards Hindus as a collective. Such language reveals an innate communal animosity, where the very existence of Hindus, irrespective of their actions, becomes the justification for violence. It reflects a mindset where Hindus are viewed not as fellow citizens, but as religious "others" who can be threatened, dehumanised, or eliminated purely because of their faith. This is a key hallmark of hate crimes where violence or threats are based solely on identity, and in this case, the identity being targeted was unmistakably Hindu. This kind of rhetoric is meant not just to intimidate but to spread fear across an entire community, and it reinforces a communal superiority complex that seeks to justify violence against those who are religiously “other.” By comparing Hindus to animals sacrificed during Bakri Eid, the perpetrator invoked an image that is not only graphically violent but also intentionally designed to humiliate and provoke. In Hinduism, the cow is revered as a sacred being, and equating Hindus with animals slaughtered in Eid was a direct attempt to mock their religious beliefs and provoke emotional and social unrest. This dehumanising rhetoric is consistent with patterns seen in hate crimes, where the targeted community is portrayed as less than human to justify or normalise violence against them. The tone, content, and delivery of the threats were meant to instil fear and assert a supremacist posture. This act goes beyond hate speech. It’s a targeted expression of religious hostility, meant to degrade, dehumanise, and provoke the entire Hindu community. Thus, it constitutes a hate crime driven by doctrinal contempt for Hinduism and its adherents.