Hindus blamed for chanting 'Jai Sri Ram' and arrested as Muslim mob attacks Hindu religious procession
Rayachoti, Andhra Pradesh, India 
3 March, 2025
Case Summary
In Rayachoti, Andhra Pradesh, a Hindu procession led by devotees of lord Veerabhadraswamy was attacked and pelted with stones by a mob of almost 500 Muslims. However, instead of holding the Muslim perpetrators accountable, the police unfairly filed cases against Hindus, despite them being the victims of the violence. According to news reports, following the violence, the police registered two separate cases—one against Hindus and another against Muslims. However, both cases were contradictory to each other. Reserve Police Inspector J. Narasimha Reddy’s complaint named 16 Hindus as accused and charged them under sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 132, 109, 196, 351(2), 61(2) r/w 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS-2023). Meanwhile, Reserve Inspector of Police Mekala Peddaiah filed a case against 17 Muslims under similar sections, along with Section 3 of the PDPP Act. Despite being the victims of the violence, Hindu devotees faced serious charges while comparatively milder sections were applied to Muslims. The issue was raised in the Andhra Pradesh Assembly by Adoni BJP MLA Parthasarathy, who questioned the police’s rationale for filing serious charges against Hindus while applying lenient sections against Muslims. He directly challenged SI Narasimha Reddy, demanding to know on what grounds he had named RSS and VHP members as accused. He asked, “Does he even know their role? These organisations are known for their selfless service to the nation and Hindus. How can he demean them by filing such a complaint?" The BJP MLA also criticised the FIR, which absurdly claimed that chanting “Jai Shri Ram” provoked the Muslim mob. He directed statements at the Home Minister and said, “Is chanting ‘Jai Shri Ram’ unlawful? Do we need permission to say 'Jai Shri Ram'? Who is he trying to appease?” He questioned the Home Minister on why adequate security arrangements had not been made and condemned the police’s attempt to blame the RSS. He further criticised that the Muslim organisations were omitted from the investigation and called for a fair inquiry into the events. In response to the biased actions of the police, VHP leaders strongly condemned the authorities, accusing them of prejudice and misuse of power. They highlighted that while Muslims were the aggressors, openly threatening to kill Hindu devotees, the police had unfairly arrested Hindus. Further, the police justified their actions by claiming that “Jai Shri Ram” chants had provoked the Muslim mob, despite the fact that the attackers had already warned Hindus not to pass through the area and had threatened them with violence. VHP national spokesperson Dr Shashidhar questioned, “If ‘Jai Shri Ram’ is provocative, then why is ‘Allahu Akbar,’ which is broadcast daily from mosques, not considered incitement?” He described the attack as a deliberate, premeditated assault intended to assert Muslim dominance over Hindus. He said, “The mentality of questioning ‘How dare you pass through these lanes?’ suggests an alarming mindset, as if public roads in Muslim-populated areas are inaccessible to others.” The arrested Hindu devotees received support from TTD Trust Board member Bhanu Prakash Reddy, who visited them in Kadapa Central Jail. He fully backed them and demanded that the state government take decisive action against the attackers. Hindu organisations, along with heads of Hindu mathas and Hindu saints, carried saffron flags and demanded the withdrawal of false cases filed against Hindus. They collectively condemned the attack on Hindu processions, festivals and temples in Andhra Pradesh.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the category- Restriction/ban on Hindu practices. Within this, 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 the Veerabhadraswamy procession was not merely an act of violence but a deliberate attempt to suppress Hindu religious expression. The fact that a Hindu procession passing near a mosque was deemed provocative highlights a clear effort to restrict Hindu religious presence in public spaces. This reflects a disturbing assertion of Islamist dominance, where Hindus are being made to feel unwelcome and deprived of their right to openly practice their faith in certain areas. Despite this, rather than protecting the rights of Hindus to practice their faith freely, the police instead acted as enforcers of restrictions on Hindu religious practices. The unjust criminal charges filed against Hindu devotees, despite them being the victims of the attack, reveal the complicity of state institutions in curtailing Hindu religious freedoms. Further, it is important to note that the FIR filed by the police in this case claimed that chants of ‘Jai Shri Ram’ instigated the Muslim mob. This amounts to a direct assault on Hindu identity and religious expression. By portraying a Hindu religious slogan as inflammatory while Islamic slogans like 'Allahu Akbar' face no such scrutiny, the authorities exposed their bias. Criminalising ‘Jai Shri Ram’ is an attempt to shame and silence Hindu identity in public discourse, serving as a blatant example of institutionalised suppression of Hindu religious expression. Since such arbitrary and biased actions reflect deep-seated prejudice against Hindu beliefs and are clear indicators of religiously motivated hate, this case is being classified as a hate crime driven by animosity toward Hindu identity.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
State and Establishment
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
