Hindus chanting “Jai Shri Ram" amid Holi celebrations attacked with stones by Muslim mob
Birbhum district, West Bengal, India 
13 March, 2025
Case Summary
In Anaipur village, in the Birbhum district of West Bengal, Hindus celebrating Dol Purnima and Holi amid chants of 'Jai Shri Ram' were attacked by a Muslim mob. Hindus were intimidated and threatened for chanting the religious slogan. According to media reports, BJP's national spokesperson Amit Malviya tweeted on his official X account, stating, “Hindus were attacked in Birbhum for celebrating Holi! Under Mamata Banerjee’s rule, West Bengal is increasingly resembling Bangladesh." Amit Malviya further alleged that the attack was led by a local Trinamool Panchayat member, where Muslims targeted Hindus for chanting “Jai Shri Ram” and even questioned, “How dare you raise this slogan?” These statements were heard in the video Amit shared in his tweet. He also claimed that the government and police were failing to protect the Hindu community while shielding the Muslim attackers. He stated, "Shockingly, despite the presence of police, the attacks escalated, and instead of preventing the violence, law enforcement reportedly shielded the attackers. Videos from the incident show Hindus claiming they were assaulted while the police stood by." Following the violence, the Birbhum district administration imposed internet restrictions and suspended VoIP services in five Gram Panchayats near Sainthia town until 17th March 2025. They stated, “In view of the recent events in some areas, internet transmissions and voice-over-internet telephony may be used for spreading rumours or unlawful activities in the geographical area of Sainthia town, including Sainthia Municipality, Hatora GP, Mathpalsa GP, Harisara GP, Fariyapur GP, and Fulur GP under Sainthia police station in Birbhum district. Therefore, these services may be temporarily suspended." The cases of intolerance, hatred, and violence against Hindus are not new in West Bengal. Recently, multiple cases of Hindu temple vandalism were reported. The state government and police downplayed the incidents, claiming no religious angle could be found. For instance, on 7th March, a Muslim man named Sheikh Indu vandalised an idol of Devi Shitala and set it on fire at a temple in Baruipur city, South 24 Parganas district. In this case, the police suggested the accused had 'mental health issues'. Similarly, on 9th March 2025, a Hindu temple of Devi Kali was vandalised in Basirhat city, North 24 Parganas district. Here too, the West Bengal police stated that the attack was not communal and again suggested the attacker suffered from 'mental illness'.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added as a religiously motivated hate crime under two prime categories of the tracker. The first is- Attack not resulting in death. Under this, the first sub-category selected 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 sub-category selected is- Attack against Hindu devotees. Hindu devotees are a few of the easiest targets of religiously motivated hate crimes because during the festival/procession/puja etc, for non-Hindus it is easy to profile their victims on the basis of religion. Hindu devotees come under attack on several occasions by individual non-Hindus or mobs of non-Hindus owing to their animosity against Hinduism, its symbols and tradition/practices. There are several instances of Hindu devotees being attacked while they worship in temples or temporary religious structures, during religious processions, doing bhajan/kirtan/puja in their own homes, in the residential society etc. These attacks are perpetrated by non-Hindus primarily because of their animosity towards Hindus and their faith. In some cases, the trigger for the violence may be non-religious, however, there are two elements that make these hate crimes. First, the Hindus who come under attack are attacked violently while indulging in religious activity. Whether they are in a place of worship or not is immaterial to the crime. When individuals are attacked while indulging in religious practices, the attack in itself is a hindrance to their freedom to practice religion and therefore constitutes a hate crime. Secondly, religious supremacist doctrines and ideologies deem religious practices of Hindus to be offensive ab initio since they are considered “sinful” by these ideologies, worthy to be annihilated by force or coercion. Driven by these religious supremacist ideologies and doctrines, the attacks against Hindu devotees stem from intrinsic animosity towards Hinduism. In some cases, the trigger for the violence may be non-religious, however, it develops into a religiously motivated crime during the course of the violence. Since these attacks stem from animosity towards Hindus and Hinduism, they are considered religiously motivated hate crimes under this category. The third sub-category selected under this is- Communal clash/attack. 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 second prime category under which this case has been placed is- Restriction/ban on Hindu practices, within which, the sub-category selected 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 categorized as a hate crime. The attack on Hindus in Anaipur village, Birbhum district, for celebrating Dol Purnima and chanting "Jai Shri Ram" exemplifies a pattern of religiously motivated hostility towards Hindu religious expressions in West Bengal. "Jai Shri Ram," is a phrase that holds deep significance in Hinduism. The targeting of Hindus for merely raising a religious slogan, coupled with reported intimidation and threats, underscores an environment of intolerance that seeks to suppress Hindu identity. The aggression exhibited by the Muslim mob, particularly their challenge—"How dare you raise this slogan?"—demonstrates an assertion of dominance over public religious expressions of Hindus. This reaction indicates an inherent hostility towards the chant of "Jai Shri Ram," a slogan that holds deep religious and cultural significance for Hindus. By questioning the very right of Hindus to raise this slogan, the attackers sought to enforce an unwritten prohibition against the open practice of Hindu faith in that locality. The challenge was not merely a spontaneous reaction but a calculated act of intimidation designed to instill fear among Hindus and suppress their religious identity. It suggests an environment where Hindu religious expressions are treated as provocative, while other religious groups enjoy unrestricted freedom to express their faith. Such actions reflect the deep disdain for the victim's religious beliefs and identity, which is why this case has been documented here. Further, the reported involvement of a Trinamool Panchayat member in leading the attack further raises concerns about political complicity and the failure of the state apparatus to protect Hindu communities. The police's inaction, as highlighted in eyewitness accounts and video evidence, not only emboldens such aggressors but also signals systemic bias against Hindus. This incident is not an isolated one but part of a disturbing trend in West Bengal, where Hindu religious sites and symbols have frequently come under attack. From Hindus being arrested for chanting 'Jai Shri Ram' slogans, to denying permissions for Hindu religious processions to her stoic silence whenever Hindus get attacked by Islamists in the state, there are several evidence to show that the Mamata Government in West Bengal has, in the past, passed umpteen prejudicial orders to clamp down on the religious rights of Hindus and show her affinity towards the Muslims in the state.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
Unknown
Perpetrators Gender
unknown
Sources 
