Newspaper labels Muslim occult practitioner as Hindu tantrik in child sacrifice case in Uttar Pradesh
India 
13 July, 2025
Case Summary
The Times of India reported an incident where it wrongly described a Muslim occult practitioner as a Hindu Tantrik. The newspaper also used a generic image of a Hindu Tantrik. In Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, police arrested Mohd Asad for the ritualistic murders of two boys, aged 14 and 11, which he admitted were part of a planned series of 11 child sacrifices to gain supernatural powers, a practice he said he learned from his father. The case began when 14-year-old Mohd Uwais of Nababgarhi village went missing after offering namaz on July 10, 2025. His family later received a ransom demand of Rs 5 lakh from his phone, along with a QR code, and transferred Rs 5,000 before contacting the police. Phone surveillance led investigators to Asad, his neighbour. During the arrest at the Saroorpur police station locality, Asad opened fire at the police and was shot in the leg. A loaded gun was seized. Uwais’s body was recovered from a dilapidated house in Nai Basti, where he had been strangled and partially dissolved with acid. Asad also confessed to murdering an 11-year-old boy who had been missing for three months. His skeletal remains were recovered from a nearby field. Villagers stated that Asad and his family had a long history of occult practices and disturbing behaviour, particularly towards boys, with past complaints ignored by police. He further admitted planning a larger black magic ritual requiring 11 child sacrifices. Police registered charges under BNS Section 103 (murder) and destruction of evidence, sent him to jail, and initiated further forensic and investigative review.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The primary category in this case is: Hate speech against Hindus. The subcategory under this is: Anti-Hindu subversion and prejudice. Hate speech is defined as any speech, gesture, conduct, writing, or display that is prejudicial against a specific individual and/or group of people, which is leading to or may lead to violence, prejudicial action or hate against that individual and/or group. Media plays a specific and overarching reach in perpetuating prejudicial attitudes towards a community owing to unfair, untrue coverage and/or misrepresentation/misinterpretation, selective coverage and/or omission of facts of/pertaining to issues affecting a specific religious group. This type of bias can dehumanise the victim group, making it easier for others to justify harmful actions against them, which aligns with the objectives of hate speech laws aimed at preventing such harm. It is often observed that the media takes a prejudicial stand against the Hindu community driven by their need to shield the aggressor community which happens to be a numeric minority, however, is the one perpetrating violence against Hindus. For example, the media is often quick to contextualise religiously motivated crimes against Hindus, omit or misrepresent facts that point towards religiously motivated hate crimes, justify and/or downplay religiously motivated hate crimes or simply present fake news to stereotype Hindus. Such media bias leads to the denial of persecution and is often used to dehumanise Hindus, leading to justification for violence against them. For example, the media covered several fake allegations of Hindus targeting Muslims and forcing them to chant Jai Shree Ram. Most of these cases were proved false and fabricated after police investigation. These fake news reports were subsequently never retracted or clarified. Such fake news led to the justification of violence and dehumanisation of Hindus based on the argument that since Hindus targeted Muslims and forced them to chant Jai Shree Ram, the dehumanisation of Hindus and violence against them was par for the course and merely a retaliation. Such media bias leads to prejudicial portrayal of Hindus and offers a justification for violence against them and therefore, is considered hate speech under this category. In this case, the Times of India’s choice to describe Mohd Asad, an Islamic occult practitioner, as a “Tantrik” and the use of the image of a Hindu Tantrik is a deliberate misuse of terminology, especially when the religious and cultural origins of the term are well established. The word “Tantrik” is intrinsically linked to Hindu traditions and has no doctrinal or ritual connection to Islamic occult practices, which have their own distinct terminology, such as “peer” or “faqeer”. Despite the clear difference, TOI employed the Hindu term, thereby obscuring the perpetrator’s actual religious context and subtly transferring the negative connotation of his crimes onto a Hindu identity. This editorial choice reflects a pattern in certain mainstream media narratives, where Islamic offenders are rebranded with Hindu-associated labels to deflect scrutiny from their actual religious affiliation. The term “Tantrik” is deeply rooted in Hindu spiritual and ritual traditions, referring to practitioners of Tantra, a legitimate and codified set of esoteric practices within Hinduism, Buddhism, and certain Indic faiths. It is not a generic label for any occult practitioner, nor does it have any association with Islamic belief systems. Applying the term to an Islamic occult practitioner is both factually incorrect and culturally misleading, as it erases the distinct theological and ritual boundaries between Hindu Tantric traditions and practices found in Islamic occultism, such as Sihr or black magic. Misusing “Tantrik” in this context not only distorts the religious identity of the accused but also perpetuates misinformation that can fuel prejudice and confusion about Hindu traditions. This is a clear instance of hate crime against Hindus, where TOI insinuated that the perpetrator is a Hindu.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Others
Perpetrators Range
Unknown
Perpetrators Gender
unknown
Sources 
