Attack on Hindu sentiments: Indian poet makes derogatory remarks about revered Hindu symbol and religious leader
Kolkata, West Bengal, India 
18 March, 2017
Case Summary
A derogatory remark about the revered Hindu symbol Trishul was made by a Bengali poet, Srijato Bandopadhyay, who wrote a line in his poem saying "Condoms on Trishul". According to media reports, the accused, Srijato, a Bengali poet, had written a controversial poem titled Abhishap (Curse), in which he included a line referring to putting a condom on a Trishul, the divine weapon of Lord Shiva and Goddess Durga. He posted this poem on his Facebook page on 19th March 2017, coinciding with the day Yogi Adityanath took oath as the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh. A translation of the offensive line in the poem reads: “As long as women are raped after being excavated from their graves, condoms should be worn on Trishuls.” This statement directly mocked sacred Hindu symbols, provoking widespread outrage among devotees and Hindu groups. Following the publication of the poem, a First Information Report (FIR) was registered against Srijato at the Siliguri Cyber Crime Police Station for hurting religious sentiments. The poem also contained references equating Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath with a disease, further intensifying public anger over its offensive nature.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case is being added to the tracker under the primary category- Hate Speech against Hindus. The 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 other subcategory selected is- Mocking/denigrating Hindu leaders. 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. Religious leaders are often seen as representatives of the community, especially, the community’s religious faith and beliefs. Mocking or denigrating a religious leader specifically owing to his religious identity and/or the religious rituals he observes can be considered hate speech because the motivating factor of the speech is animosity and/or dislike for what he represents – the religious beliefs and faith of the community. It is important to note that mere insulting words against an individual do not constitute hate speech. It is entirely possible that insulting words are used for an individual, however, the specific speech is not the result of religious hate and/or animosity towards the professed faith of the religious leader, but the individual himself. For the speech to be considered hate speech, the speech itself or the motivating factor behind the speech has to be religious in nature. Such speech which denigrates Hindu religious leaders specifically owing to animosity towards the faith they profess and the community faith they represent will be treated as hate speech under this category. In this case, the poem written by Bengali poet Srijato Bandopadhyay, in which he mocked and denigrated the sacred Hindu symbol Trishul, stands as a clear instance of anti-Hindu hate speech. The Trishul, or trident, holds profound spiritual significance in Hinduism and is revered as a divine weapon wielded by Lord Shiva and Goddess Durga. It symbolises the destruction of evil, the preservation of righteousness, and the balance of the three cosmic forces—creation, preservation, and dissolution. By making an obscene reference suggesting that condoms should be placed on the Trishul, the accused insulted not just a religious object but the core of Hindu devotion itself. Such an act reflected blatant disregard and contempt for the Hindu faith and its revered symbols, exposing deep-seated religious animosity towards Hindus and their sacred beliefs. This level of denigration went beyond satire and constituted a deliberate attempt to offend the sentiments of an entire religious community. The accused also directed his contempt towards Yogi Adityanath, the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh and the head of the Gorakhnath Math, a significant religious centre of the Nath Sampradaya, one of Hinduism’s oldest and most respected monastic orders. Yogi Adityanath is not merely a political leader but a revered Hindu religious figure who symbolises the integration of governance with faith-based values. By comparing him to a disease in the same poem, the perpetrator extended his insult from Hindu symbols to the very leadership that upholds and represents Hindu tradition. Given that the accused had already mocked a sacred symbol of Hinduism, his denigration of Yogi Adityanath clearly arose from hostility towards his religious standing rather than political opposition. This deliberate attempt to malign a leading Hindu saint and his religious identity reflected a conscious pattern of disdain towards Hinduism, its leadership, and its belief systems, establishing the hate speech as explicitly religiously motivated. This case also reflects a broader pattern of selective targeting of Hinduism and its revered symbols under the guise of artistic expression and freedom of speech. While such individuals often claim creative liberty, their works consistently aim to insult and provoke the Hindu community, while avoiding similar provocations against other faiths. This selective mockery reveals a predisposed bias and contempt towards Hinduism, its religious symbols, and its practitioners. Such actions are not expressions of free thought but deliberate attempts to normalise hatred against Hindus in cultural discourse. Given that this case fulfils the parameters of a religiously motivated hate speech, it is being included in the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker.
Case Status
Complaint registered
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Others
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
