Temple burnt, stones pelted at Hindus celebrating cricket victory; mosque Imam confirms Muslims attempted to lynch HIndus chanting 'Jai Shri Ram'
Mau, Madhya Pradesh, India 
8 March, 2025
Case Summary
Communal clashes broke out in Madhya Pradesh's Mhow during the victory celebration of Team India’s ICC Champions Trophy win. The situation escalated when some Muslims pelted stones at the celebratory procession as it approached the Jama Masjid. The unruly mob destroyed shops and damaged vehicles, and a few were set on fire. A report by Zee News says that the Islamist mob also attempted to burn down a Sitala Mandir in the vicinity. A video shared by the news agency showed traces of arson in the Hindu temple. According to Dainik Bhaskar, those celebrating the victory chanted Jai Shri Ram, resulting in the Muslims of the area in front of Jama Masjid becoming irate and attacking the procession. DO News reported that the fans were chanting 'Bharat Mata Ki Jai' when they were viciously attacked. According to a PTI report, the procession came under attack as it approached Jama Masjid. Visuals that emerged showed slogans of Allahu Akbar and Nara-e-Taqbeer being raised near Jama Masjid. On information, the police teams from nearby police stations and para-military force rushed to the spot and brought the violent situation under control. The Imam of Jama Masjid admitted that it was the Muslims who started the violence by attempting to lynch the Hindus who were chanting Jai Shri Ram during the cricket victory celebration. In an interview given to News18, the Imam admitted that the first sign of violence was the Muslims from Jama Masjid catching hold of Hindus who were chanting Jai Shri Ram and attempting to lynch them. Indore collector Ashish Singh has informed that action under the stringent National Security Act (NSA) has been taken against some of the rioters. Thirteen arrests have been made so far.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under two prime categories. The first is- Attack not resulting in death. Under this, the first sub-category selected is- Attacked for crossing Muslim area. One of the reasons that Hindus get attacked unprovoked specifically by Islamists is for crossing ‘Muslim areas’. Essentially, Muslim mobs often attack Hindus crossing or present in certain areas which have a majority Muslim population. It has often been cited as one of the reasons to blame Hindus for attacks against themselves, signalling that Hindus displaying religious symbols, taking our religious processions or crossing any area which is dominated by Muslim residents is a provocation in and of itself. These areas are mostly ghettoized areas where mobs mobilize quickly to attack Hindus for a variety of reasons like playing music during a religious procession, crossing a mosque, wearing a tilak or any other religious symbol in a Muslim-dominated area, praying at a local temple in that area etc. There have been cases where the few local Hindus of that area have been attacked on their way to the Temple for prayers as well, simply because the area is considered a Muslim-dominated area. Several times, it is entirely possible that the immediate trigger for the violence against Hindus was non-religious in nature, however, the violence became religiously motivated in nature because the area was Muslim dominated and the residents on the whole harboured animosity towards Hindus, evidenced from the actions of the mob, the slogans, and the nature of the attack. Such crimes are motivated by the religious identity of the victims and are therefore classified as hate crimes under this category. The second sub-category selected is- Communal clash. Communal clash is a form of collective violence that involves clashes between groups belonging to different religious identities. For a communal clash between Hindus and non-Hindus to qualify as a religiously motivated hate crime, the trigger of the violence itself would have to be anti-Hindu in essence. For example, if there is a Hindu religious procession that comes under attack from a non-Hindu mob and after the initial attack, Hindus retaliate in self-defence, leading to a communal clash between the two religious communities. While at a later stage, both communities are involved in the clash/violence, the initial trigger of the violence was by the non-Hindu mob against the Hindus and therefore, it could safely be termed as an anti-Hindu violence. Further, the trigger would also have to be religiously motivated. In the cited example, the attack by the non-Hindu mob was against religious processions and, therefore, can be concluded to be religiously motivated. In some cases, the trigger may be non-religious, however, it develops into religious violence against Hindus at a later stage. In such cases too, the foundational animosity towards Hindus becomes the motivating factor of the crime and therefore, it would be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime against Hindus under this category. The third sub-category selected under the above-mentioned category 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. The second category selected here is- Attack on Hindu religious representation and under this, the sub-category selected is- Attack on Temples. In Hinduism, a temple is the abode of the Deity. The Deity in the Temple is consecrated, thereby, making it a real, breathing entity. Hindus believe that not just the Deity but the temple premises itself are sacred to Hindus since Hindus hold the faith that the entire Temple space is an amalgamation of the divine energy of the deity. Given the central significance of Temples in Hindu Dharma, any attack against a Hindu Temple or its peripheral premises is an attack on the faith itself and is born out of animosity towards the faith, of which, the Temple is a central tenet. Any manner of attack against a Temple and/or its premises would, therefore be considered a religiously motivated hate crime. The third prime category under which this case has been placed is- Hate speech against Hindus and the sub-category selected under this 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. This incident, where a Muslim mob unleashed a violent attack on Hindus celebrating India's Champions Trophy win, has various religious markers that justify its inclusion in the Hinduphobia tracker under several categories and subcategories. Firstly, this incident has been placed under the category of "Attacked for crossing Muslim area" because as soon as the celebratory group entered the vicinity of the Jama Masjid, they were attacked with stone pelting, vandalism, and arson. This pattern is seen in several communal clashes where Hindus entering or passing through Muslim-majority localities are met with hostility. In such cases, the underlying motive often stems from the belief that certain areas are exclusive to a particular religious community, and outsiders—especially Hindus—are not welcome. The reaction from the Muslim mob indicates a deep-seated intolerance towards Hindu religious expressions and processions, especially when such events take place in or around areas they consider their own. It reveals a disturbing sense of Islamic supremacy harboured by the attackers. This sense of entitlement and superiority not only reflects deep-seated prejudice but also highlights an attempt to assert religious dominance over public spaces. Historically, such clashes have been tactically used to intimidate Hindus and discourage them from crossing or settling in certain areas. The fact that the violence was premeditated—with petrol bombs, arson, and targeted attacks—reinforces the notion that this was not an ordinary scuffle but rather a deliberate act of aggression meant to send a strong message: that Hindus should not cross, celebrate, or assert their religious and national pride in Muslim-majority localities. Further, the claim that firecrackers were the cause of the violence needs to be critically examined. Bursting firecrackers is a common celebratory practice across India, and there have been numerous instances where Muslim crowds have burst firecrackers near Hindu religious sites or in mixed areas without similar violent reactions from Hindus. If firecrackers were truly the issue, the response should have been a complaint or discussion, not an organized attack involving stone-pelting, arson, and the targeting of a temple. The disproportionate nature of the response suggests that the real issue was the presence of Hindus celebrating openly in a Muslim-dominated area, which the attackers sought to suppress. It is important to highlight here that this incident in Mhow is not an isolated incident. Across various parts of India, there is a well-documented pattern of attacks on Hindu religious processions, including Ram Navami and Hanuman Jayanti celebrations, when they pass through Muslim-majority areas. These attacks typically follow the same pattern—stone-pelting, violent mobs, and, in many cases, arson or temple attacks. The violence in Mhow fits this pattern. Secondly, the sub-category 'Attacked for Hindu Identity' has been chosen. This category is particularly relevant because the attack was not merely a reaction to an event but was motivated by the Hindu identity of the people involved in the victory celebration. Reports indicate that the participants in the procession were chanting Jai Shri Ram slogans, and this triggered the attackers. In fact, the Jama Masjid Imam also admitted that there was an attempt to lynch Hindus chanting Jai Shri Ram. "Jai Shri Ram" is not just a slogan; it is a deeply significant religious chant that represents devotion to Lord Ram, one of the most revered deities in Hinduism. It is a common expression of faith and is frequently used in prayers, religious gatherings, and festivals. By chanting Jai Shri Ram during a victory celebration, the Hindus in the procession were simply expressing their religious and cultural identity in a way that is both natural and customary within their tradition. The problem arises from the way expressions of Hindu faith are often framed as provocative in certain contexts. There have been multiple cases across India where Hindus chanting Jai Shri Ram have faced violent reactions from Islamist groups, even though Islamic religious slogans like Allahu Akbar and Nara-e-Takbeer are frequently used in public, including in protests and political rallies, without being deemed provocative. This selective intolerance suggests that the opposition to Jai Shri Ram is not about noise levels or disturbance but rather about an inherent hostility toward Hindu identity being asserted in public spaces. The repeated targeting of Hindus chanting 'Jai Shri Ram' in communal incidents further strengthens the argument that the attack was motivated by Hindu identity. The same pattern has been observed in West Bengal, Bihar, and several other states, where mobs have reacted violently to Hindu processions raising this slogan. In fact, the Hinduphobia tracker has listed innumerable such cases where Hindu children have been stigmatised, dehumanised, punished, persecuted, humiliated and denied their religious rights by figures of authority, often teachers, specifically in connection with the Jai Shri Ram chant. The rampant hate speech to demonise Hindus, specifically using the Jai Shri Ram chant, started translating into persecution of Hindus on the ground with Ram Navami processions being attacked by Muslims, Hindus being jailed for chanting Jai Shri Ram and Hindus being assaulted and students being actively persecuted. Thirdly, the targeting of a temple in this communal violence is not an isolated act but a direct attack on Hindu religious identity and places of worship. It highlights a pattern where Islamist mobs, in moments of communal tension, retaliate not just against individuals but against Hindu sacred spaces themselves. Temples hold immense religious, cultural, and emotional significance for Hindus. Any attack on a temple, therefore, is an attack on the Hindu collective consciousness and a deliberate attempt to instill fear within the community. In this incident, the violent mob that first attacked the Hindu victory procession did not stop at targeting individuals—they extended their aggression toward a Hindu place of worship and even attempted to burn it down. This act is also a clear sign that the violence was not just about the firecrackers or a passing procession; it was about attacking the Hindu religious presence itself. The next category relevant here is Hate speech against Hindus, within which the sub-category selected is- violent threats. This is because the chanting of ‘Allahu Akbar’ and ‘Nara-e-Takbeer’ during the violent attack on the Hindu victory procession and the temple was not a benign religious expression but a deliberate attempt to instill fear and assert dominance. These slogans, when used in the context of mob violence, riots, and terror attacks, take on an unmistakable character: they signal an Islamist war cry, historically used to justify aggression against non-believers or 'kafirs'. While ‘Allahu Akbar’ (meaning ‘Allah is the greatest’) is originally a phrase of religious devotion, its use during attacks, riots, and acts of terror has transformed its perception among non-Muslims, particularly Hindus. It is frequently heard during Islamist-led communal violence, indicating a doctrinal motivation behind the aggression. In this case, videos emerging from the site confirm that as soon as the Hindu celebratory procession neared the Jama Masjid, Islamist mobs began chanting ‘Allahu Akbar’ and ‘Nara-e-Takbeer’—right before launching their attack. This sequence is crucial because it establishes the intent behind the violence. The slogans were not being used as a mere religious expression but as a psychological weapon to terrorise Hindus. Here, it becomes crucial to mention how historically, ‘Allahu Akbar’ and ‘Nara-e-Takbeer’ have been associated with several Islamic conquests, instances of forced conversions, jihadist terror attacks and mob violence against non-Muslims. Whether in Kashmir, the Delhi riots (2020), Bangladesh pogroms (2021 and 2024), or similar cases across India, these slogans have been weaponised to unite violent Islamist mobs against Hindus. In fact, even when two Islamists identified as Riyaz and Ghous Mohammad brutally beheaded the poor Hindu tailor Kanhaiya Lal in Udaipur, Rajasthan, in 2022, they shouted ‘Gustakh-e-Nabi ki ek hi saza, sar tan se juda’ while chanting ‘Allahu Akbar.’ By using this same pattern in Mhow, the intent of the attackers was clear: this was not a reaction to firecrackers but a premeditated assault against Hindus. Another concerning aspect of this attack is the violent backlash against the slogan ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai,’ which symbolises national pride and unity in India. By targeting individuals for chanting this slogan, the Islamist mob demonstrated a rejection of Indian national identity in favour of a broader Islamist allegiance. It is important to note that Muslim extremists not only harbour deep-seated animosity toward Hindus and their faith but also perceive India as a Hindu-majority nation. The foundation of India’s partition was rooted in the belief that Islam constituted a distinct nation that could not coexist within a Hindu-majority country like India. Additionally, many Muslims adhere to the concept of transnational unity, or the Ummah, which asserts that all Muslims worldwide form a single nation. This ideology often results in a divided sense of national loyalty, where allegiance is directed toward the global Muslim community rather than a nation-state perceived as Hindu-majority. The hostility toward patriotic slogans like ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ has been evident in numerous instances where Islamist radicals reject national identity in favour of the Islamic Ummah.
Case Status
Case sub-judice
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
From 10 to 100
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
