Muslim men make disparaging remarks inside temple, distribute Islamic pamphlets, lure Hindus to convert to Islam
Jamkhandi, Karnataka, India 
3 May, 2025
Case Summary
A group of Muslim men entered the premises of the Ramatheerth Temple in Jamkhandi, Karnataka, on May 4, 2025, and began distributing Islamic pamphlets while engaging in conversations with visiting Hindu devotees about Islamic teachings. The incident occurred on May 4 2025, around 4:30 pm during regular temple hours, when the temple was open to worshippers. A group of Muslim men, later identified as Mustafa Murtusaheb Momin, Alisaheb Shabir Alagundi, and Suleman Riyaz Ahemed Galagali, entered the premises and began distributing pamphlets promoting Islamic teachings. They also engaged visiting Hindu devotees in conversations about their faith. According to eyewitnesses and Ramesh Mallappa Navi, the subsequent complaint, the situation escalated when he, accompanied by Sri Shrishail Apte and several other devotees, questioned the motives behind these activities. In response, the individuals made derogatory remarks about Hinduism. Witnesses reported that they declared, “If you remain a Hindu, you will never find God. There is no God except Allah, and all other gods are Kafir.” They further stated that their mission was to convert the entire world to Islam and warned that any opposition would be met with serious consequences. “We will not spare your lives,” the accused threatened the Hindu devotees. Alongside these declarations, the men offered material inducements, including vehicles and job opportunities in Dubai, to some of the devotees, which were interpreted as deliberate attempts to lure people into religious conversion. Following these events, a complaint was filed with the local police. The authorities registered a First Information Report (FIR) against the three men under Sections 299 (offence against religion), 351(2) (causing insult to religion), and 3(5) (attempt to convert through inducement) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. They also invoked Section 5 of the Karnataka Protection of Right to Freedom of Religion Act, 2022, which addresses illegal conversion activities conducted through force, fraud, or inducement. The police initiated an inquiry based on the FIR and took down the statements of the complainant and several temple-goers who had witnessed the incident. The episode drew significant concern from local Hindu groups who regarded the act as a religious violation and sought prompt legal action.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category of: Attack on Hindu religious symbols. The first subcategory under this is: Desecration of Hindu religious symbol. Icons and symbols or a religious representation of a spiritual ideal are widely revered in Hinduism. Iconography is of vital significance in the Hindu milieu. It helps connect people’s spiritual beliefs with the real world. Iconography within the Hindu faith takes several shapes and forms. Murtis are of most significance to Hindus, to which daily rituals, prayers and offerings are done. Besides the murtis, there are several other symbols which have deep significance in the Hindu faith – the Om and Swastika for example. Since these Hindu religious symbols hold paramount importance in Hinduism, any desecration of symbols, icons, murtis, religious representations and manifestations, is driven by animosity towards the faith itself which manifests itself through these murtis, icons and symbols. Therefore, any desecration of these Hindu religious symbols and representations is considered religiously motivated hate crimes under this category. The second subcategory under this category is: Breaking rules of places of worship. Sanatan Dharma is not a religion of one book, which is to say that while it has religious scriptures that form the central tenets of the faith, there are several traditions followed through thousands of years, mostly passed from generation to generation orally. One of these oral traditions or written traditions is the rules of specific temples. Certain temples have rules which are traditional rules, dependent on the worship of the presiding deities. These rules and traditions have been followed for thousands of years whether they find scriptural mention or not. Such traditions are based on the nature and rules of worship of the presiding deity of that temple. Any non-compliance of these traditions owing to animosity towards the faith or for the sake of activism stems not only from the lack of faith in the presiding deity but also disregard for the faith of the devotees of that deity/temple and implicit bias against the faith, the tradition and the deity itself. Since these specific traditions are central to the faith of the devotees of that specific temple and presiding deity, any non-compliance with these traditional rules would be considered a religiously motivated hate crime. The second primary category under this is: Predatory proselytisation. The subcategory under this category is: Conversion/ attempts to convert by inducement. Predatory Proselytisation is not just limited to threat, harassment, force and violence, but it also has contours of stealth. In several cases, the Hindu victim is exploited to convert, with non-Hindus taking advantage of their poverty. In such cases, the Hindu victim who is suffering financially is offered monetary benefits, including lucrative offers for jobs, health treatment, education, etc, to induce the victim into changing his/her religion. In such cases, the religious identity of the victim and the aim to disenfranchise him from his faith form the heart of the crime. Also, taking advantage of and exploiting an individual’s economic vulnerabilities is widely acknowledged as exploitation, forms of which are often penalised by law. Such cases therefore are considered religiously motivated hate crimes since the victim’s religious identity forms the very heart of the crime itself. The other sub-category selected under Predatory Proselytisation is- Attempting to convert/converting by denigrating Hinduism. In several cases, Hindus are converted or an attempt is made to convert Hindus by denigrating their faith, Hinduism. In such cases, the Hindus associate with the non-Hindu perpetrators often by choice and then, the attempt to convert them by insulting their faith, showing the faith down etc begins. An example of this would be a non-Hindu gathering where the Hindus are attending the gathering of their own free will. However, once they attend the gathering, there is an explicit attempt to convert them by abusing their faith and hailing the faith of the perpetrator. The denigration of the Hindu faith is often based on misrepresentation of the Hindu faith, its doctrine and scriptures and insult to espoused traditions if not blatant lies about Hindu beliefs and ways. Such conversions or attempts at conversions are driven by animosity towards the Hindu faith and are therefore documented as religiously motivated hate crimes. The third category selected here is- Hate speech against Hindus, and within this, the sub-category selected is- Anti-Hindu slurs, mocking faith. Anti-Hindu slurs and the deliberate mocking of the Hindu faith owing to religious animosity involve the usage of derogatory terms, stereotypes, or offensive references to religious practices, symbols, or figures. One of the common anti-Hindu slurs used against Hindus is “cow-worshipper” and “cow piss drinker”. The intention of using this term is to demean and mock Hindus as a group and their religious beliefs since Hindus consider the cow holy. Additionally, some symbols and the slurs attached to them have a historical context that exacerbates the insult, hate, stereotyping, dehumanisation and oppression against Hindus. Cow worship has been used for centuries to denigrate Hindus, insult their faith and oppress Hindus specifically as a religious group. There has been overwhelming documentation about how cow slaughter has been used to persecute Hindus with cow meat being thrown in temples and places of worship. There has also been overwhelming documentation where cow meat (beef) has been force-fed to Hindus to either forcefully convert them to Islam or denigrate their faith. Apart from cow worship, the Swastika – which holds deep religious significance for the Hindus – has also been misinterpreted and distorted to use as a slur against Hindus. Similarly, the worship of the Shivling has been used by supremacist ideologies and religions to denigrate Hindus owing to religious animosity. Such slurs and denigration stem out of inherent animosity and hate towards Hindus and their faith, therefore, it is categorised as hate speech targeted at Hindus specifically owing to their religious identity. This case qualifies as a religious hate crime because the act of entering a Hindu temple and using it as a venue to disseminate religious material unrelated to the temple’s tradition is, in itself, an act of desecration. In Hinduism, temples are sacred spaces of worship, and the deities are revered with deep respect. Acts of temple desecration and deliberate idol desecration, as demonstrated in this case, are seen as deeply offensive and sacrilegious. Similarly, preaching a different faith within its premises defiles its sanctity and violates the spiritual integrity of the place. Such actions stem from entrenched animosity and an intent to insult the faith. Additionally, most Hindu temples, including the one in Jamkhandi, observe restrictions regarding the kind of speech and activity permitted inside their grounds. These rules are rooted in both religious belief and established custom. Introducing external religious discourse not only breaches these norms but constitutes a deliberate provocation. It disregards the autonomy of the Hindu faith to regulate its worship and ritual space according to its own doctrines. The Muslims accused here were openly trying to convert Hindu devotees by insulting and belittling Hinduism while praising Islam. As part of their attempt to turn Hindus against their own religion—an act rooted in deep-seated hostility towards Hindu beliefs—they were also selling books that glorified Islam and portrayed Hinduism in a negative light. Moreover, the Muslim men involved did not merely promote Islam or try to impose their religious views; they offered material inducements such as employment opportunities in Dubai and vehicles to lure Hindus away from their faith and adopt Islam. This introduces a coercive element into the interaction. The use of enticement to promote a religion, especially in a space sacred to another community, transforms the act into one of targeted proselytisation. In classical Islamic jurisprudence, the world is conceptually divided into two broad categories: Darul Islam (abode of Islam) and Darul Harb (abode of war). Darul Islam refers to territories under Islamic rule, where Islamic law prevails and Muslims can freely practice their religion. Darul Harb, by contrast, denotes lands governed by non-Muslims where, from the perspective of orthodox jurisprudence, Islamic rule has not yet been established. Within this framework, non-Muslim populations residing in Darul Harb are seen as subjects of eventual Islamic expansion, either through da’wah (invitation to Islam) or more coercive forms historically justified as a religious obligation. This classification has been historically invoked to legitimise various forms of missionary activity, including conversion efforts that may involve pressure, inducement, intimidation and violence. In the present case, the conduct of the Muslim accused at Ramatheerth Temple reflects this ideological underpinning. Their assertion that “there is no God except Allah, and all other gods are Kafir,” and that those who remain Hindu “will not be able to find God,” coupled with their open declaration of a mission “to make the whole world turn towards Islam,” reveals an intent to impose religious supremacy in a space that symbolises Hindu belief. The offering of material incentives such as vehicles and employment opportunities abroad, particularly in Muslim-majority nations like the UAE, serves as a calculated strategy to exploit economic vulnerability as a tool for religious conversion. It is crucial to mention that the use of the term “kafir” for Hindu deities was not just a casual insult but a loaded theological term with deep-rooted implications. In Islam, “kafir” means someone who rejects Allah, and it carries a strong sense of moral and spiritual condemnation. By calling Hindu gods “kafir,” they weren’t merely saying “your gods are wrong”; they were labelling them as unbelievers who deserve punishment according to their beliefs. This choice of words wasn’t random. It comes from lessons they’ve heard—whether in sermons, madrassas or from radical speakers, that teach Islam is the only true faith and that any assertion of Hindu identity or religious freedom is not only undesirable but a threat to Islamic supremacy. When they said that Hindus “will not be able to find God” and vowed “to make the whole world turn towards Islam,” they were echoing those teachings. Using “kafir” in a Hindu temple becomes an act of aggression because it attacks the very foundation of Hindu worship and shows a mindset that sees other religions as failures to be corrected. Further, the threats issued, “we will not spare your lives,” towards those who resisted or questioned their campaign further indicates that this was not a peaceful religious dialogue but an expression of theological domination rooted in the Darul Harb worldview, where the legitimacy of Hinduism is rejected outright, and its adherents are to be brought under Islamic fold by inducement or coercion. Conduct of this nature, directed specifically at Hindus within a Hindu temple, constitutes a hate-driven religious offence with the intent to destabilise and undermine the dignity, safety, and religious identity of the targeted community.
Case Status
Perpetrator acquitted
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
Unknown
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
