Hindu children assaulted by police while celebrating Diwali in Cooch Behar; woman also struck for intervening
Cooch Behar, West Bengal, India 
19 October, 2025
Case Summary
A group of Hindu children celebrating Diwali by bursting firecrackers in the Railghumti area of Ward No. 9 in Cooch Behar, West Bengal, were assaulted by a police officer on 20 October 2025. The incident took place during the festive evening when the children were joyfully lighting crackers near their homes. According to Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Suvendu Adhikari, Cooch Behar’s Superintendent of Police, Dyutiman Bhattacharya, personally assaulted several minors and even struck a woman who attempted to intervene. Eyewitnesses recounted that the officer, described as being in an unstable state of mind, violently dispersed the gathering without provocation. The attack created panic in the locality, where families had been engaged in Diwali celebrations. Adhikari later condemned the act, calling it an outrageous abuse of power and evidence of the state’s growing hostility toward Hindu festivals. The episode intensified anger among local residents, who viewed the assault as a targeted humiliation of ordinary Hindus observing their traditional celebration. A day after this incident, on the evening of 21 October 2025, a Kali idol was discovered beheaded at a puja pandal in Uttar Chandanpur, also known as Chandranagar village, under the Suryanagar Gram Panchayat of Kakdwip Assembly in South 24 Parganas district. The desecration occurred amid the ongoing Diwali and Kali Puja festivities, heightening the sense of grief and anger across the state.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The primary category in this case is: Attack not resulting in death. The subcategory under this is: Attacked for Hindu identity. In several cases, Hindus are attacked merely for their Hindu identity without any perceived provocation. A classic example of this category of religiously motivated hate crime is a murder in 2016. 7 ISIS terrorists were convicted for shooting a school principal in Kanpur because they got ‘triggered’ seeing the Kalava on his wrist and tilak that he had put. In this, the Hindu victim had offered no provocation except for his Hindu religious identity. The motivation for the murder was purely religious, driven by religious supremacy. Such cases where Hindus are targeted merely for their religious identity would be documented as a hate crime under this category. Another category under this is: Restriction/ban on Hindu practices. The subcategory under this 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 categorised as a hate crime. The other subcategory selected is- Administration restricting religious practice. In several cases, it is seen that the administration/state disallows a religious practice owing to prejudicial orders and concerns, targeted specifically against the Hindu community. Such restriction/prohibition would be considered documented as a hate crime because the orders are often a result of pressure by groups that harbour animosity towards Hinduism and Hindus. Often, the restriction by the authorities is driven by bias, hostility, or prejudice against the specific community being stopped from holding a religious practice, by pressure groups that harbour animosity towards Hindus, intrinsic to their faith. Since practices are intrinsic to the faith of the Hindus, such prejudicial restriction is considered a curtailing of the fundamental rights of the Hindu community. In several cases, for example, the authorities ban a Hindu religious practice due to pressure from groups opposed to the religion. In other instances the prohibition is selectively enforced against one religious group (Hindus) while others are allowed to proceed. There are still other cases where the authorities preemptively restrict a religious practice by Hindus because those who hold animosity towards Hindus may get “provoked” leading to them being violent, thereby assuaging the sentiments of those who hold animosity towards Hindus by curtailing the religious rights of Hindus. Such acts and orders are prejudiced, indicating discriminatory motives owing to the capitulation to groups that harbour animosity towards Hindus and therefore, would be categorized as a religiously motivated hate crime since the original pressure leading to the order itself is a result of hatred/bias/prejudice/religious hate against Hindus. This case has been added to the Hinduphobia Tracker because it exemplifies a deliberate pattern of targeting Hindus for their religious identity and the expression of their faith, demonstrating both societal hostility and administrative bias. The assault on children celebrating Diwali in Railghumti, Cooch Behar, on 20 October 2025, by a police officer, is not an isolated act of law enforcement overreach but appears symptomatic of an environment in which Hindu religious practices are increasingly suppressed or disrespected. Diwali, as one of the most sacred festivals in Hinduism, represents not only a cultural celebration but also deep spiritual significance, encompassing rituals of light, community, and devotion. The violent disruption of these celebrations, particularly the assault on minors and a woman, constitutes a direct attack on the right of Hindus to observe their faith freely, without fear of coercion or punishment from authorities. The subsequent desecration of a Kali idol in Uttar Chandanpur on 21 October 2025 further underscores the systemic nature of hostility toward Hindu religious expression in the state. These acts are not isolated grievances; they occur in the backdrop of administrative indifference, if not complicity. BJP leader Suvendu Adhikari highlighted that the local administration initially sought to conceal the desecration by locking the temple and intimidating the villagers, which demonstrates a failure of governance to protect Hindu communities. Such bias fosters an atmosphere where anti-Hindu elements feel emboldened to carry out acts of intimidation, assault, and sacrilege with impunity. In the framework of the Hinduphobia Tracker, this case falls under the primary category of "Attack not resulting in death" and specifically under the subcategory "Attacked for Hindu identity." The victims—the children, the woman, and the broader Hindu community observing Diwali—were targeted solely for practising their faith. There was no provocation beyond their religious identity, making this a textbook instance of a religiously motivated hate crime. Additionally, the case also illustrates aspects of "Restriction on expression of Hindu identity," where the administration’s actions, or inactions, effectively suppress the normal observance of a sacred festival. The authorities’ readiness to intimidate and obstruct Hindu celebratory practices signals a prejudicial approach that compromises both law and order and the constitutional rights of Hindus to freely manifest their religion. The combination of direct physical assault, the targeting of sacred cultural practices, and the administrative bias in response to these incidents validates the inclusion of this case in the tracker. It demonstrates how Hindu communities in West Bengal are subjected to both social and institutional hostility, highlighting a concerning trend in the state’s handling of Hindu religious expression. The Tracker seeks to document such incidents to provide a comprehensive record of Hinduphobia, noting the ways in which both private actors and state mechanisms contribute to the erosion of Hindu rights and the systematic undermining of their cultural and spiritual freedoms.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
State and Establishment
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
