Hindu man shot dead by Muslim men for opposing their illegal activities

Case ID : 90a09e8 | Location : East Delhi, Delhi, India | Date of Incident : Sat, 8 March, 2025

Case ID : 90a09e8

East Delhi, Delhi, India

8 March, 2025

Hindu man shot dead by Muslim men for opposing their illegal activities

Attack resulting in death

Attacked for opposing radicals or trying to save victim

Case Summary

In the Ghazipur area of Delhi, a Hindu man named Rohit Chavda was shot dead by Muslim men identified as Tariq, Naseem, Yamin, and two others. The police registered a case under the Arms Act and murder, arresting the accused Tariq and Naseem, while a search is underway for the three absconding suspects. Following the murder, a large number of residents gathered and blocked NH-24, demanding justice for the slain youth. The protesters alleged that the 32-year-old Hindu man was killed by “jihadists” who had been dominating the area, extorting money, and engaging in illegal activities. They claimed that Rohit Chavda was targeted for speaking out against the accused men's unlawful operations. Speaking to ANI, one of the protesters, Virender Singh, stated, “A Hindu brother from Ghazipur village was shot at night by jihadists. He belonged to the Gujar community. The incident occurred around 2 AM. These individuals were asserting dominance in the area, extorting money, and conducting illegal businesses. Rohit opposed their actions and declared that such dominance would not be tolerated. As a result, he was shot twice and died on the spot. He lived with his maternal uncle, as his father was not present, and he was the eldest of three brothers.” Another protester, Chaudhary Karam Singh Rawat, criticised the authorities, saying, “This is a matter concerning the Delhi Police and the administration. If they wanted to, they could have arrested the murderer by now. We are suffering because of their inaction. Rohingya Muslims have settled here with money, and if the police were willing, they could have apprehended the culprits by now. If justice is not served, there will be violence and bloodshed. The road will remain blocked until justice is delivered.” Reports indicate that Rohit Chavda, who worked as a supervisor at the Ghazipur landfill site, had been receiving threats in the days leading up to his murder. His family has also confirmed that he had been facing intimidation before the attack. While the incident heightened communal tensions in the area, the police dismissed any communal angle, instead attributing the murder to a monetary dispute between Rohit Chavda and the accused.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

This case has been added to the tracker under the prime category of- Attack resulting in death and under this, the sub-category selected is- Attacked for opposing radicals or trying to save victim. In several cases, Hindus are attacked for opposing religiously motivated crimes being committed against a fellow Hindu or simply for voicing an opinion opposing radical elements, who either have in the past or continue to persecute Hindus. In such cases, the initial attack against the victim, against which the Hindu was trying to defend the victim, would also need to be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime. Since the initial crime itself was religiously motivated and the subsequent crime of attempting to save the victim or speaking against the radical elements ends up inviting a violent attack, it would also be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime. Under this category, cases where the attack led to the death of the Hindu victim/s would be documented. The circumstances surrounding the Hindu youth's murder point to a targeted attack motivated by his opposition to the unlawful activities of radical elements in the area. According to reports and local testimonies, Rohit Chavda had taken a stand against individuals who were allegedly asserting dominance, extorting money, and running illegal businesses in the locality. His resistance to these activities ultimately made him a target, resulting in his brutal murder. Such incidents highlight the growing dangers faced by those who dare to speak out against radical elements. It is important to highlight here that the testimonies of residents explicitly linked the Hindu youth's killing to his defiance of radicals operating in the area. Despite this clear indication, the police downplayed the communal aspect of the crime, attributing it to a mere monetary dispute. The police, in many such cases, where the motive behind the crime is obvious but not explicitly mentioned, deny that the crime committed was in any way motivated by a religious bias or say that there was ‘no communal angle’ to the crime. Several factors are generally at play here. Many a time, the police downplay incidents of low-level communal crime because it is their jurisdiction that comes under question. The police also often say that there was ‘no communal angle’ to a crime when there was one because they wish to ensure that owing to the crime already committed, there is no further flare up in the area. Likewise, the Left media and the leftist elite are also inclined to emphasise this "no communal angle" trope, especially wherever the victim of the crime is a Hindu. However, only a police statement or a media report, for instance, cannot be enough to determine whether there is a communal angle present in the crime that has been committed. In fact, to determine whether the crime is communal in nature or not, we need to give emphasis to the ground realities. For example, in the case of Rinku Sharma, the Bajrang Dal activist who was mercilessly stabbed in his house in front of his family members in Delhi’s Mangolpuri area in the year 2021, the leftist media and the leftist ecosystem tried to peddle that there was no communal angle to the crime. Even the police denied that the crime was communal in nature. However, Opindia spoke to several people who are on the ground with the family of Rinku Sharma and we were told that the communal tension in the area is palpable. The family of Rinku Sharma has said that the Muslims of the area held a grudge against Rinku ever since he celebrated the Ram Mandir verdict Like the case of Rinku Sharma, those cases where even if the police have denied a communal angle or the leftist media have gone on an overdrive to peddle the ‘no communal angle’ trope, the ground reality, like the victim’s family or relative's testimonies, make it clear that there was an obvious religious bias that led to the crime, will be documented in this tracker. Going by the same logic, since the local residents testified that the attack on the Hindu youth was deliberate and not accidental, this case has also been included in the hate tracker.