Hindu minors subjected to institutional hate: Muslim teacher forces them to read Urdu, gets them beaten by Muslim students for non-compliance
Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh, India 
1 August, 2025
Case Summary
In Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh, Hindu children were pressured to learn Urdu and were manipulated and indoctrinated against Hinduism by their Muslim teacher. According to media reports, the accused, Mohammad Salauddin, taught at the government composite school in Harvanshpur Dharam village, Bijnor district. The victims narrated that Mohammad Salauddin used to force them to study Urdu, and if any student refused, he would have them beaten by Muslim students. Students revealed that Mohammad Salauddin questioned the existence of the Hindu god, saying, “You do not have a god (Bhagwan). Has anyone seen god (Bhagwan)?” The video of the incident spread on social media sparked outrage among Hindu organisations, who demanded strict action against the teacher. After the incident came to light, District Basic Education Officer (BSA) Yogendra Kumar ordered an investigation. The accused was suspended. The BSA stated clearly that religious discrimination would not be tolerated in schools.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category- Attack not resulting in death. The 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. Another primary category selected is- Predatory Proselytisation. Within this, the subcategory selected is- Predatory Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation and subtle indoctrination. The tertiary category selected is- 'Conversion of minor' and 'Pattern of targeting Hindus'. Religious brainwashing essentially means the often subtle and forcible indoctrination to induce someone to give up their religious beliefs to accept contrasting regimented ideas. Religious grooming or brainwashing also involves propaganda and manipulation. It involves the systematic effort, driven by religious malice and indoctrination, to persuade “non-believers’ to accept allegiance, command, or doctrine to and of a contrasting faith. Cases of such grooming or brainwashing are far more nuanced than direct threats, coercion, inducement and violence. In such cases, it is often seen that there is repeated, subtle and continual manipulation of the victim to induce disaffection towards their own faith and acceptance of the contrasting faith of the perpetrator. While subtle indoctrination is widely acknowledged as predatory, an element which is often understated in such conversions or the attempts of such conversion is the role of loyalty and trust which might develop between the perpetrator and the victim. Fiduciary relationships are often abused to affect such religious conversion. For example, an educator transmitting religious doctrine of a competing faith to a Hindu student. The Hindu student is likely to accept what the teacher is transmitting owing to existence of the fiduciary relationship. The exploitation of the fiduciary relationship to religiously indoctrinate victims would also be included in this category. Since the underlying animosity towards the victim’s faith forms the basis of predatory proselytization, such cases are considered religiously motivated hate crimes. The other subcategory 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. Another primary category selected in this case is- Hate Speech against Hindus. Within this, the subcategory 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. In this case, the Muslim teacher, Mohammad Salauddin, targeted Hindu students specifically for their religious beliefs—forcing them to learn Urdu, ridiculing the concept of Bhagwan, and inciting other students to physically assault those who resisted. This is an attack on Hindu identity because the Hindu students were deliberately singled out and targeted for their religious beliefs and practices. They were coerced into learning Urdu and subjected to humiliation and physical intimidation when they resisted—actions rooted not in educational objectives but in their Hindu identity. The teacher’s derogatory remarks about Hindu beliefs, such as denying the existence of Bhagwan, and the use of Muslim students to enforce compliance further underline the religious motivation. The targeting was solely because they were Hindu, making it an attack on their identity. This case involved the systematic targeting of Hindu children and the manipulation of their religious beliefs by a figure of authority. Indoctrinating children against Hinduism is inherently anti-Hindu and stems from religious animosity. By instilling negative perceptions about Hinduism, the Muslim perpetrator created an environment of confusion and insecurity among the children, increasing the risk that they might abandon their ancestral faith and be drawn towards other religions. Such action creates a fertile ground for the conversion of vulnerable Hindu children. Targeting individuals for their faith is a direct assault on Hindu identity and dignity, making it a crime motivated by religious hostility. Additionally, forcing Hindu children to learn Urdu, a language deeply enmeshed with Indian Islamic culture, served as a method of imposing Islamic cultural norms on Hindu students. When Hindu children refused to comply, the teacher arranged for their punishment at the hands of Muslim classmates, escalating the situation from cultural imposition to blatant communal intimidation and violence. This not only coerced children into accepting a cultural and linguistic identity that was not their own, but also fostered a climate of fear and submission. Language here is not being taught as a neutral academic subject but is being imposed alongside derogatory comments about Hindu beliefs, creating a setting where Hindu children are pressured to conform to a particular religious worldview. Such actions, where coercion and violence are used to subjugate individuals based on their faith, are a clear demonstration of crime motivated by religious hostility. In this case, it is important to highlight that the victims were minors, which meant that the element of consent and genuine change of conscience was missing from the outset. Minors, due to their young age and lack of maturity, are particularly vulnerable to manipulation and coercion. They may not have the capacity to fully grasp the implications of converting to another religion or getting subtly manipulated against their own faith. The Muslim perpetrator intentionally targeted and exploited this vulnerability. This case exemplified the use of coercion and manipulation to achieve religious conversion, clearly demonstrating the religious motives behind the crime. It is also significant to note that the Muslim perpetrator did not single out just one Hindu student but selectively targeted several Hindu children. This specific targeting of multiple Hindu children demonstrates a pattern of using coercion and manipulation to strip them of their religious identity. Targeting an entire group of children for their religious identity clearly showcases the religious hostility behind the crime. The incident was further aggravated by hate speech from the Muslim teacher, who actively denigrated Hindu gods. By telling students, “You do not have a god. Has anyone seen god?” he sowed seeds of doubt and mockery regarding Hindu beliefs, attacking the core spiritual values of the Hindu community. Such derogatory remarks are not merely personal scepticism; they are direct verbal assaults on the faith and practices of young Hindu children. Hindu gods and temples are considered sacred and deeply revered within the Hindu community. Such denigrating speech against Hindu gods and temples is a direct result of hatred and contempt for Hinduism and its followers, making this a religiously motivated hate speech. Taken together, these actions- religious manipulation, forced imposition of Islamic culture, intimidation, and hate speech- are emblematic of deep-seated religious hostility and a determined attempt to dismantle Hindu identity among vulnerable children. This incident stands as a glaring example of hate crime against Hindu children for their faith; therefore, this case is being added to the hate crime database. Disclaimer: Media reports do not mention the exact date when the incident occurred. Therefore, for the purpose of documentation, we are using the earliest date of its reporting—2nd August 2025—as the date of the incident.
Case Status
Complaint filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
