Hindu man targeted by Muslim mob over ‘blasphemy’ allegations; violent Sar Tan Se Juda slogans raised in Uttar Pradesh

Case ID : 9958802 | Location : Budaun, Uttar Pradesh, India | Date of Incident : Sun, 21 September, 2025

Case ID : 9958802

Budaun, Uttar Pradesh, India

21 September, 2025

Hindu man targeted by Muslim mob over ‘blasphemy’ allegations; violent Sar Tan Se Juda slogans raised in Uttar Pradesh

Attack not resulting in death

Attacked over 'Blasphemy'

Hate speech against Hindus

Violent threats

Case Summary

In Badaun, Uttar Pradesh, a Hindu man named Anil Singh was hounded by a Muslim mob over unverified allegations of ‘blasphemy’ against Islam. The mob went on a violent rampage, attempting to attack Anil Singh over these accusations. They also raised the violent slogan “Sar Tan Se Juda” – a beheading call raised by Muslim extremists against those who are accused of insulting Islam. According to media reports, the Hindu victim, Anil Singh, a resident of Aonla in Bareilly, worked at the clinic of a Muslim woman named Shazia. On the morning of 22nd September 2025, he was at Dr Shazia’s house discussing clinic matters when several dozen Muslim youths assembled and began protesting. They accused him of posting objectionable content against Islam. The Muslim mob also chanted Sar Tan Se Juda slogans. Following this, the mob attempted to attack Anil and vandalise property during the unrest. For nearly an hour, chaos gripped the area before the police finally brought the situation under control. Dr Shazia filed a complaint against 60–70 Muslims, including the husband of the village head, on charges of rioting, intimidation, disturbing public order, and spreading hatred. A separate memorandum was also submitted by members of the Muslim community. Tensions remained high in the area, and police deployment was maintained continuously after the incident. Bagrain Police Station in‑charge Praveen Kumar Chauhan arrived with a police force. The Muslim mob, however, refused to disperse. As the situation worsened, Circle Officer Sunil Kumar Singh reached the spot, dispersed the mob by force, and later held discussions with the husband of the village head at the police station. It was only after this intervention that the commotion subsided. In the afternoon, dozens of Hindu organisation activists from Aonla gathered at the police station in support of Anil Singh. They protested that false accusations had been levelled against the Hindu victim and that the Muslim mob had attempted to attack him. Later in the day, however, Muslim individuals named Mobin Mubarak, Riyasat, and others submitted a memorandum demanding action against Anil Singh, claiming that he had insulted Islam.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

The primary category selected in this case is- Attack not resulting in death. Within this, the subcategory selected is- Attacked over 'Blasphemy'. Blasphemy essentially refers to the desecration of anything which is held sacred/holy to a group of people. However, for religious supremacist groups, the elements of ‘blasphemy’ are ever-changing, shifting and expanding – leading to infringement on the rights of other religious groups, freedom of speech and expression, threats and even physical violence. There are instances where blasphemy is also used as a dog whistle to target Hindus owing to intrinsic animosity towards Hinduism. There are several instances where stating truths as mentioned in the non-Hindu doctrine itself has led to unmitigated violence against Hindus. There have also been instances where non-Hindus have themselves created a ‘blasphemous’ situation, like placing a Quran in a temple, to use it as an excuse to attack Hindus. Essentially, Blasphemy charges are often made up and/or are used to shut down any form of criticism of non-Hindu faiths and as a tool to target Hindus. Any physical violence over Blasphemy charges against Hindus are foundationally based on animosity for Hindus and their faith owing to religious supremacist ideologies, therefore, such attacks would be documented as religious motivated hate crimes under this category. Another primary category selected is- Hate Speech against Hindus. The subcategory selected is- Violent Threats. Violent threats, explicit, implicit or implied, is the most dangerous form of hate speech since it goes beyond discriminatory and prejudicial language to express the intent of causing harm to an individual or a group of people based on their religious identity and faith. There could be several different kinds of threats that are issued to Hindus based on religious animosity. An explicit threat would mean the direct threat of violence towards an individual Hindu, a group of Hindus or Hindus at large. Physical violence, death threats, threats of destruction of property belonging to Hindus and threats of genocide would mean explicit threats against Hindus for their religious identity. Implicit threats may not be a direct threat but implied through the use of symbols of actions – for example – in the Nupur Sharma case, other than explicit threats, there were also implicit threats when Islamists took to the streets to burn and beat her effigies. It implies that they want to do the same to Nupur Sharma – thereby is considered an implicit threat. Violent threats can be delivered in person, through letters, phone calls, graffiti, or increasingly through social media and other online platforms. It would be important to understand that a threat – explicit or implicit, online or offline – to an individual who happens to be a Hindu does not qualify as a religiously motivated threat. Such a threat, while vile and dangerous, could be owing to non-religious reasons and/or personal animosity. To qualify as a religiously motivated threat, it would need to exhibit an indication that the individual is being targeted for religious reasons and/or owing to his/her religious identity as a Hindu. In this case, it is highly likely that most of the Muslim mob had no clear knowledge of what the Hindu man actually said, but that hardly mattered. The crowd was driven primarily by a deep-rooted bias against Hindus. In many instances of so-called ‘blasphemy,’ Muslim mobs often only need an excuse to attack non-Muslims, especially Hindus. The charge of blasphemy has become a common and convenient trigger, frequently fabricated or exaggerated, to justify violence against Hindus. The criteria for what amounts to blasphemy are often vague and shifting, allowing Muslim extremists to weaponise it at will, making Hindus easy targets of brutal attacks. In such cases, a mere allegation of blasphemy is enough to spark outrage, mob violence, and assault on Hindu victims. Muslim extremists have historically used these charges as a pretext to incite violence, settle personal scores, or intimidate Hindus into silence and submission. The disproportionate targeting of Hindus under the guise of blasphemy is no accident but stems from deep-seated religious prejudice. The charge acts as a tool to unleash violent rampages against the Hindu community. In this incident, the Hindu victim was hounded by a Muslim mob over unproven allegations of blasphemy. They attempted to attack him and vandalise the property where he was present. Instead of pursuing legal avenues, the mob resorted to violence, using the unverified charge of blasphemy as an excuse to target the victim’s religious identity. This is not an isolated event but part of a larger, entrenched pattern of systemic religious targeting. Such spurious allegations are weaponised to legitimise hate crimes and social ostracism against Hindus. Furthermore, this is not the first time such violent outrage has occurred against Hindus over blasphemy allegations. In 2022, former BJP leader Nupur Sharma faced beheading and gang-rape threats from Muslim extremists over her remarks on the Prophet of Islam and his child bride Aisha’s marriage. Despite merely quoting Islamic hadiths, she was relentlessly hounded and forced to live under constant security due to credible threats. Similarly, in 2022, a Hindu youth named Prakash Lonare was attacked by a Muslim mob in Karnataka’s Bagalkote over his social media comment on Tipu Sultan, an Islamic tyrant known for murdering and forcibly converting thousands of Hindus. Prakash’s simple act of adding a smiley emoji to a post about Tipu Sultan provoked an enraged mob of 15-20 people who assaulted him. Even Hinduphobia Tracker had previously reported a case where a Hindu man was attacked by a Muslim mob on the charges of ''blasphemy''. This incident occurred in September 2025 in Ranebennur, Haveri, Karnataka. A Hindu doctor named Dr Gurumurthy Rachotimath was brutally attacked by a Muslim mob over unverified allegations of blasphemy against Islam. The attackers also torched a bike, which was parked outside the victim's clinic. Therefore, it is evident that such unverified accusations of blasphemy are mere excuses to target the Hindu community, making them religiously motivated hate crimes. Another important point to address in this case is that the Muslim mob also raised 'Sar Tan Se Juda' slogans. The use of the slogan “Sar Tan Se Juda” constitutes an explicit and religiously motivated threat directed at Hindus. “Gustakh-e-Rasool ki Ek hi saza, sar tan se Juda, sar tan se Juda”, which translates to “There is only one punishment for being disrespectful to Rasool (Prophet Muhammad), their head separated from their torso, their head separated from the torso”, is an Islamist clarion call, that has become a staple feature of violent protests that have so far claimed the lives of at least 6 Hindus, including Kanhaiya Lal in Udaipur and Umesh Kolhe in Amravati, after Muslim fundamentalists, egged on by the dog-whistling of Alt News co-founder Mohammed Zubair against former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma, resorted to violence for what they perceived as ‘blasphemy’ against Prophet Muhammad. From Kanpur in India’s northern plains to the southern metropolis of Bengaluru, from Kolkata in the east to Hyderabad in the south, protests in the name of blasphemy have erupted in almost every corner of the country as Islamists took to the streets running amok and shouting “Sar Tan Se Juda” chants over the perceived belief of blasphemy against their Prophet. Though a radical Muslim outfit in Pakistan coined this slogan, it has gained popularity among Islamists in regions beyond its geographical origins. Over the years, we have seen large crowds of Islamists chanting the “Sar Tan Se Juda” slogan, which is nothing but a direct incitement to violence against Hindus, leading to murders committed in the name of blasphemy. The radicalised outcry is not merely a statement of disapproval; it is a call for the execution of an individual through beheading, based on their religious identity. When this slogan is raised, it sends a clear and terrifying message not just to the individual targeted but also to anyone else who might share similar views or dare to express them. This tactic of intimidation aims to silence dissent and suppress freedom of expression, particularly in religious discourse. It aims to instil fear in the broader community. Islamists use this tactic to settle personal scores with non-Muslims, particularly Hindus, by levelling fabricated charges of blasphemy against them, which causes outrage and paints a target on them. The underlying hatred and animosity toward non-Muslims, especially Hindus, drive these false blasphemy accusations as a means to subjugate and victimise them. The slogan’s danger lies not merely in its verbal content but in its historical and contemporary consequences. Across South Asia, including India, there are multiple recorded cases where individuals accused of blasphemy have been murdered after such chants were raised by Muslim crowds. From school teachers to political leaders, victims have been executed in acts directly linked to the “Sar Tan Se Juda” call. It therefore serves as a bridge between verbal incitement and physical violence, collapsing the distance between threat and action. The slogan was not an expression of community pride or protest; it was an explicit incitement to religiously motivated killing. Even in this particular case, the connection between the Muslim mob chanting these slogans and their subsequent violent rampage against the Hindu victim, Anil Singh, was immediate. They swiftly turned to violence and targeted the Hindu man for his religious identity, making it clear that this slogan was a direct call to incite violence against any Hindu accused of ‘blasphemy'. As this case meets the parameters of a religiously motivated crime, it has been added to the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker.