Kanwariyas chanting Hindu slogans brutally attacked in Varanasi, forced to convert to Islam and chant Islamic slogans; Muslim men abused Hindu gods
Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India 
27 July, 2025
Case Summary
In the Rajatalab area, Varanasi, two Hindu devotees, Shubham Yadav and Paltu Yadav, were asked to convert, brutally attacked and forced to chant Allahu Akbar by a group of Muslim men. The accused also abused Hindu deities. According to reports, a group of Kanwariyas were taking kanwars to the Jansa Shiv temple, while chanting “Har Har Mahadev” and "Bol Bam" on their way. The two Hindu men, Shubham and Paltu, were stopped near the Rajatalab railway gate by a group of 10–12 Muslim men. The Muslim group accused them of harassing women. The accused demanded that the Hindus stop chanting Hindu slogans, instead forcing them to say “Allahu Akbar” and convert to Islam, stating, “Leave Hinduism and accept Islam.” When Shubham and Paltu refused to comply, they were brutally assaulted. One of the accused struck Paltu Yadav on the head with a sharp weapon, causing a serious head injury. Shubham Yadav was chased down and beaten on the road as he tried to escape. The attack escalated in front of a local mosque, where more assailants joined in, kicking and punching the victims until they collapsed. The victims’ lives were saved only when other Kanwariyas rushed to their rescue. The victim, Paltu Yadav, narrated the incident. He said that the Muslim men first tried to engage them in conversation about their chanting and the Kanwar Yatra. When the devotees ignored the objections and tried to proceed, the attackers hurled obscene comments at Hindu deities and launched a violent assault. FIR was filed against 12 accused based on Paltu Yadav’s complaint. Six accused, including one Munawwar, were arrested. Police are conducting raids to apprehend the remaining perpetrators. Also, police issued a public statement framing the violence as a dispute between a kanwariya and a local shopkeeper. The attack triggered massive outrage among Hindu devotees. Protesters blocked roads, demanding strict action. Senior police officers, including the Station Officer and ACP of Rajatalab, arrived to control the situation, but the Kanwariyas began a sit-in protest, demanding justice.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category of: - Predatory Proselytisation. Within it, the sub-category selected is: - Harassment, threats, coercion for conversion. Harassment covers a wide range of behaviours of an offensive nature. It is commonly understood as behaviour that demeans, humiliates, and intimidates a person, including threats and coercion. Harassment and threats, in this case, find their root on discriminatory grounds which has the effect of nullifying a person’s rights or infringing upon his freedom to exercise his right specifically owing to the victim’s religious identity. Verbal and physical threats and psychological or physical harassment are often used against Hindu victims because they choose to practice their professed religion. Religious harassment also includes forced and involuntary conversions by harassment, threats or coercion. Coercion includes intimidatory tactics like force-feeding a Hindu victim beef to convert to another religion, forceful circumcision etc. In several cases documented, non-Hindu perpetrators or those who harbour specific animosity towards Hinduism, harass victims simply based on their religious identity. Such cases often also include harassment to ensure the Hindu victim abandons his/her professed religion and adopts the religion of the perpetrator. Such cases where Hindu victims are harassed to convert to the perpetrator’s religion are rooted in animosity towards the victim’s religious identity and are therefore documented as religiously motivated hate crimes. The second sub-category selected 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 second primary category selected is: - Attack not resulting in death. Within it, the 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 second 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 third primary category selected here is: - Hate speech against Hindus. Within it, 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 has been added to the tracker because two Hindu men, Shubham Yadav and Paltu Yadav, were asked to convert, violently attacked, and forced to chant Allahu Akbar by a group of Muslim men. The victims were not random individuals; they were Hindu devotees actively participating in the Kanwar Yatra. Their visible religious identity made them easy targets for profiling and assault. The attack was not provoked by any act except their religious chants and open expression of their Hindu faith. The Muslim mob deliberately sought to suppress this public expression of Hindu faith, revealing the clear religious motivation behind the violence. Such attacks stem from a deep-seated disdain for Hindu traditions and are driven by ideologies that deem Hindu worship practices to be inferior or sinful. The attack constitutes a direct interference in the free exercise of religion and thus qualifies as a hate crime against Hindu devotees. Kanwar Yatra is not merely a personal observance but a highly public and symbolic religious procession that is integral to Hindu tradition. The attack on the Kanwariyas en route to the Jansa Shiv temple was an attack on a Hindu devotee and thus represents a broader hostility to Hindu practices. They are often challenged by non-Hindu mobs due to doctrinal opposition to public displays of Hindu faith, particularly involving symbols like saffron clothing, music, and chanting. The disruption of such religious pilgrimage by non-Hindus is therefore more than just a physical altercation; it is an ideological act rooted in the desire to suppress the outward expression of Hindu religious identity. Also, Shubham Yadav and Paltu Yadav were explicitly targeted for being Hindus and practising their religion. The group of Muslim assailants attempted to force them to chant “Allahu Akbar” and demanded they leave Hinduism and convert to Islam. The threats and physical assault were intended to intimidate, humiliate, and forcefully coerce the victims to abandon their faith. The assailants not only attempted to convert the victims but also did so by insulting and abusing Hindu deities. The conversion demand was accompanied by verbal abuse and humiliation directed at the Hindu faith. The attack followed a pattern where denigration of the victim’s faith was used as a tool to assert religious superiority and initiate conversion. The perpetrators’ hostility was not just towards the individuals, but towards Hinduism as a faith. The attackers verbally abused Hindu deities and mocked the religious practice of Kanwar Yatra. In Hinduism, deities are not symbolic figures but are sacred, living realities for devotees. Abuse of deities is therefore not just offensive speech, but a direct attack on the religious identity, dignity, and emotional core of the believer. Therefore, abuse of Hindu deities in this incident is a hate crime because it is motivated by animosity towards Hindus as a group, is intended to humiliate and coerce, and is an act of psychological violence that violates the community’s religious freedom and dignity. This pattern is seen repeatedly, where the Muslim community responds with disproportionate violence over minor scuffles, especially when the other party is Hindu. The fact that a mere chant of “Har Har Mahadev” and "Bol Bam" leads to such disproportionate and targeted violence shows that the underlying grievance was not civic or interpersonal, but religious. This transforms the assault into a religiously motivated hate crime aimed at restricting Hindu religious expression in the public sphere. The goal of the Muslim mob was not just to physically harm but to intimidate and shame Hindu devotees into silence. Forcing a Hindu to chant Allahu Akbar, insulting their gods, and demanding conversion under the threat of violence reveals the religious animosity of the Muslim mob towards Hinduism. This attack is part of a broader effort to undermine Hindu religious expression and instil fear in those who dare to practise their faith openly. It is this deliberate targeting of Hindus, based solely on their religious identity, thus this case being added to the tracker. In this case, the police framed the brutal assault on the Kanwariyas as a mere dispute between a kanwariya and a local shopkeeper, effectively denying the communal angle. However, the facts of the case clearly indicate that the attack was religiously motivated. The victims were targeted specifically for chanting Hindu slogans, abused for their faith, pressured to convert to Islam, and forced to chant Islamic slogans, while Muslim attackers openly abused Hindu deities. In many such cases, when the motive behind a crime is obvious but not officially stated, the police deny that the crime was religiously motivated or claim there was “no communal angle.” Several reasons are at play behind this pattern. 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 had 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. In this case, too, despite the police denial, the evidence of forced conversion attempts, abuse of Hindu gods, and targeting of visible Hindu devotees points clearly to a hate crime driven by religious bias. Therefore, this case has rightly been included in the tracker
Victim Details
Total Victim
2
Deceased
0
Gender
- Male 2
- Female 0
- Third Gender 0
- Unknown 0
Caste
- SC/ST 0
- OBC 2
- General 0
- Unknown 0
Age Group
- Minor 0
- Adult 2
- Senior Citizen 0
- Unknown 0
Case Status
Case sub-judice
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
From 10 to 100
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
