Targeted terror attack on Hindus in Pahalgam whitewashed as professor equates religious profiling with unrelated social issues
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India 
27 April, 2025
Case Summary
In a horrific act of terror in the Baisaran Valley of Pahalgam, Anantnag district, Jammu and Kashmir, Islamic terrorists systematically identified and targeted Hindu victims. The terrorists demanded names and religious identities, inspected ID cards, coerced tourists to recite the Kalma, and even forcibly pulled down their pants to check for circumcision—all to single out Hindus. Once identified, the Hindus were shot at point-blank range. The attack, carried out by Islamic terrorists of The Resistance Force, a proxy of the Pakistan-based terror group Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), claimed the lives of 24 Hindus and left 16 others critically injured. Following this incident, Dr Madri Kakoti, Assistant Professor in the Department of Linguistics, downplayed the religious profiling of Hindu victims during the Pahalgam terror attack. FIR was registered against her at Hasanganj police station on the basis of a written complaint submitted by Jatin Shukla alias Manmohan, co-secretary of ABVP Lucknow city unit. The post in question attracted controversy and was widely circulated on platforms in Pakistan. Dr Kakoti posted a video in which she said that religious profiling before killing someone is terrorism, as is inquiring about religion before lynching, sacking people from jobs, denying tenants accommodation, and bulldozing homes, among other acts. Dr Kakoti commented on the incident that, "What I said is a fact, and 100% correct. There is nothing wrong in this statement. It is a general one, listing crimes which fall within the definition of causing 'terror'. I can't really take any responsibility for someone thinking it is about them." Considering the seriousness of the matter, the Lucknow University administration promptly issued her a notice asking why disciplinary action should not be taken. She was given five days to respond. What added to the controversy was the fact that her post was being shared by Pakistani media outlets, causing the matter to gain international attention. Following the registration of the FIR, Hasanganj police began a detailed investigation. They were examining Dr Kakoti's social media accounts to determine the authenticity and intent behind the post. Further developments in the case were anticipated. The incident sparked anger among students at Lucknow University. A section of the student body strongly condemned the professor’s actions and demanded strict action, while others raised concerns over freedom of expression and questioned the legal measures taken against her.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case is categorised under the primary category- Hate Speech against Hindus. Under that, the relevant sub-category is- Denial or mocking of genocide/large-scale persecution. Denial or mocking of genocide/large-scale persecution/ethnic cleansing refers to the act of denying or minimizing the fact of the ethnic cleansing and/or genocide and/or religious persecution of Hindus. This often involves denying the scale, mechanisms, religious intent, or even the occurrence of the ethnic cleansing and/or genocide and/or religious persecution of Hindus. Hate speech of this kind involves the dissemination of falsehoods that deny or distort established historical facts or mock the suffering of Hindus by saying that they deserved the persecution, motivated by Hinduphobia. Denying such atrocities is not only about the denial of facts or rewriting/revising history, but it also delegitimises the religiously motivated persecution of Hindus, the religious hate/motivation/animosity that led to the persecution, and dehumanises Hindus as a religious group. Such denial of ethnic cleansing and/or genocide and/or religious persecution of Hindus not only denies the suffering but also paves the way for future/present atrocities and hate speech, inciting prejudice and violence against Hindus. It also provides a justification for violence by delinking religious animosity from religiously motivated crimes committed against Hindus. Since such denial and/or mocking of genocide/ethnic cleansing/atrocities motivated by religious animosity leads to present and future ramifications of creating more hate speech, violence, dehumanisation and delegitimisation, it would be considered hate speech under this category. The other sub-category relevant is- Anti Hindu subversion and prejudice, and within it, the tertiary category selected is- Anti-Hindu Fake News or Downplaying. 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. The incident involving Dr Madri Kakoti constituted hate speech against Hindus as she attempted to equate this massacre with unrelated social issues. By doing so, she denied the religious motivation, targeted nature, and severity of the attack on Hindus in Pahalgam. Such denial delegitimised the suffering of the Hindu victims and obscured the specific nature of the crime, which involved deliberate religious profiling followed by execution. This denial and moral equivalence diminish the gravity of the persecution and erase the intent behind the attack. Dr Kakoti shifted focus from the victims to a broader political commentary that downplayed the real-time targeting of a religious community. The timing and content of her message served to deflect attention from the facts of the case and created a narrative that could justify or rationalise religiously motivated violence against Hindus. The amplification of her statement by Pakistani media further contributed to the international circulation of prejudicial misinformation, reinforcing a narrative that undermined the reality of the Hindu victims' suffering.
Case Status
Complaint filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Others
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
female
Sources 
