Case Summary

An anti-Hindu false propaganda campaign about so-called “Hindu terror” was spread on social media following the Islamic terror attack in Delhi, India. According to media reports, on 10th November 2025, an Islamic terror attack with a massive car explosion occurred near the Red Fort area in Delhi. The blast was later found to be linked to an elaborate Islamic terror module that had been unearthed across Jammu and Kashmir, Delhi, and Haryana, involving Muslim doctors, former medical students, questionable funding channels, and Al-Falah University. However, instead of acknowledging the scale of the Islamic terror network, a section of social media users, including left-leaning groups and Muslim users, began running false propaganda about “Hindu terror”, something entirely non-existent. This narrative began following the temporary detention of a Hindu woman doctor, Dr Priyanka Sharma. As soon as the media learnt of the questioning of a Hindu doctor, several news channels ran the story, and speculation increased. However, after only a few hours, it was confirmed that Dr Sharma had been released by the police after questioning. Despite this clarification, leftist and Muslim users began amplifying the incident with a false narrative of “Hindu terror”. Notably, the same ecosystem of leftist and Muslim commentators routinely propagates narratives such as “terrorism has no religion” after every Islamic terror attack. Although Dr Priyanka Sharma was neither arrested nor named as an accused, and was not placed under any restrictive legal custody, she became a target of vicious online attacks. For example, social media user Alok Yadav targeted Dr Sharma for being a Hindu, particularly a Brahmin. He wrote, “In the Delhi blast case, Dr Priyanka Sharma from Rohtak has been arrested. Among all the Hindus caught helping terrorists, 90% belong to one particular caste. Now, if I name the caste, the mainstream will get upset.” Another user, “Amock”, wrote, “BREAKING: Dr Priyanka Sharma has been detained by investigation agencies in the Red Fort blast case. But the ministry will not say a single word. Pro-government media will stay silent, and others will pretend nothing has happened. She is Hindu, and absolutely terrorism has no religion.” Muslim social media user Nargis Bano also falsely stated that Dr Sharma had been arrested, posting, “The people who defame Muslims by looking at the religion of criminals are silent on the arrest of MBBS doctor Priyanka Sharma.” It is necessary to state that detention for questioning is not the same as an arrest. It is a standard police procedure to detain or call individuals for brief questioning during investigations, particularly when a massive terror module has been busted and linked to a major attack in the national capital. No charges were filed against Dr Sharma, no formal arrest memorandum was issued, and no accusation was levelled. It was a routine interaction between the police and an individual for the purpose of collecting information. An arrest, on the other hand, involved formally taking someone into custody. In such cases, specific legal sections were invoked, and the arrested person was required to be produced before a magistrate to establish grounds for criminal suspicion. None of these procedures took place in Dr Sharma’s case. The police questioned her merely because her name appeared in the phone records of Adeel, a former staff member of Government Medical College, Amritsar, who had already been arrested. Dr Sharma was released by the police, although her phone was retained for forensic examination — another standard procedure. Yet, several anti-Hindu commentators falsely declared that she had been “arrested”, “caught supporting Hindu terrorists”, and other similar falsehoods. This was not the first instance of the “Hindu terror” propaganda being used to deflect from actual Islamic terror attacks. Such false labelling of Islamic attacks as “Hindu terror” had occurred even earlier. For example, even after the devastating Islamic terror attack in Mumbai, known as the 26/11 attacks, it was conclusively proven that the assault had been carried out by Pakistan-backed Islamic terrorists. Nevertheless, Congress leaders such as Digvijay Singh, along with a network of leftist and Muslim commentators, propagated the false narrative that the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a Hindu organisation, and “Hindu extremists” were behind the Mumbai attacks. This narrative further popularised the baseless and anti-Hindu terms like “Hindu terror” and “saffron terror”, both of which are completely non-existent. In another such instance, not of Islamic terror but during the 1984 anti-Sikh riots in Delhi, it was a well-documented fact that in the aftermath of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s assassination, many Congress Party leaders led mobs involved in violence against Sikhs. Congress leader Sajjan Kumar was convicted and later sentenced to life imprisonment. Another leader, Jagdish Tytler, was named by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for leading violent mobs, and Kamal Nath was also accused of playing a similar role before eventually being appointed as Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh. Yet, in 1999, former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh from the Congress Party blamed the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a Hindu organisation, for those riots and asserted that the Congress Party “had no role in it”.

Case Images

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 subversion and prejudice. The tertiary category selected is- Anti-Hindu fake news or downplaying. 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. This case represents a clear instance of anti-Hindu hate speech through the deliberate and false narrative that Hindus were involved in an Islamic terror attack in Delhi, thereby maligning an entire community and inciting communal animosity. After the Islamic terror attack near the Red Fort on 10th November 2025—carried out by Islamist terrorists linked to recognised terror groups such as Jaish-e-Mohammed, and involving professionals including Muslim doctors—the leftist and Muslim factions on social media propagated the unfounded claim of "Hindu terror." This was a clear attempt to deflect guilt from the actual Muslim perpetrators and wrongfully accuse Hindus. Specifically, Dr Priyanka Sharma, a Hindu doctor, was temporarily detained for questioning as part of routine police investigations due to peripheral links in phone records to suspects. There was no evidence implicating her in any terror activities, and she was neither arrested nor charged. Yet, despite these facts, false narratives circulated claiming she was arrested for being part of a terror module, painting Hindus broadly in a negative and criminal light. This victimisation of Dr Sharma and the community she represents through the completely fabricated concept of "Hindu terror" shows clear religious animosity meant to falsely frame Hindus as terrorists in a case where they bore no responsibility. The propagation of this false narrative by leftists and Muslims reveals an intent to sow communal discord by blaming Hindus for crimes committed by Islamic terrorists, thereby stigmatising Hindus and spreading hatred. This is a textbook example of religiously motivated hate speech—targeting an entire religious community with false accusations, vilification, and misrepresentation. Such acts are motivated by deep-rooted bias and hatred for the Hindu community and their faith, making it a religiously motivated offence. Moreover, this pattern repeats historically. The term "Hindu terror" or "saffron terror" has been wielded by Leftist and Muslim groups in past incidents—such as the 1984 anti-Sikh riots and the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks—as a tool to unfairly portray Hindus as perpetrators while obscuring the real culprits. Such false labelling places Hindus in a vulnerable position, exposing them to discrimination, social stigma, and sometimes violence, solely based on their religious identity, despite the absence of any terrorist activities by them. Given that this case meets the parameters of a religiously motivated hate speech, it is being added to the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker.