When Hindu victims are blamed: dismissing patterns of targeted exploitation and Delhi riot atrocities while branding Hindutva as extremism
India 
25 May, 2025
Case Summary
Eurasia Review, a journal, republished an article written by Dr Fran Singarayar, which discussed the religious politics in India and the diplomatic future. The author dismissed love jihad as a conspiracy theory, downplayed the anti-Hindu nature of the Delhi riots and vilified Hindutva. The article was originally published by Indian Currents, a newspaper. It is written by Dr Fran Singarayar, who is a member of the Society of the Divine Word, India, Mumbai Province, and holds a doctorate in Anthropology. According to the author, India's international reputation is increasingly threatened by the domestic rise of Hindu nationalism under the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The article highlights the global diplomatic backlash following derogatory comments about the Prophet Muhammad by BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma in 2022, an incident that prompted widespread condemnation from Muslim-majority nations and risked India's strategic ties with the Gulf. The author describes how the BJP’s ideological orientation, particularly its promotion of Hindutva—a worldview emphasising Hindu religious and cultural supremacy—is undermining India’s pluralistic identity and drawing sharp criticism from the international community. The author criticises the Modi government’s policies, portraying them as part of a larger project of Muslim marginalisation. Specific attention is drawn to the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), which excludes Muslims from its provisions, and the abrogation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir, both of which are interpreted as targeting the Muslim population. The author further describes a pattern of grassroots hostility, citing hate speech events, increased communal violence, Delhi riots and cow vigilantism as manifestations of this Hindutva-driven political climate. Data from organisations like Hindutva Watch and India Hate Lab are used to support claims of a sustained and organised campaign of anti-Muslim sentiment, allegedly orchestrated or tolerated by the ruling party. The author also criticises Hindu nationalist narratives propagated through Indian media and diaspora networks, arguing that these promote Islamophobic tropes such as “love jihad” and “population jihad.” He refers them as conspiracy theories. This, the article claims, has led to a normalisation of religious prejudice in public discourse. While BJP supporters dismiss international scrutiny as politically motivated or anti-India, the author contends that such justifications ignore the substantive and growing evidence of minority exclusion. Ultimately, the author warns that unless India addresses the domestic implications of Hindutva politics, it risks damaging its diplomatic standing, weakening its global soft power, and jeopardising its economic and strategic ambitions.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category of - Hate speech against Hindus. The sub-category selected here 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 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 article dismisses the concept of love jihad as a mere “conspiracy theory.” This blanket dismissal is deeply problematic, as it trivialises documented fears and lived experiences of Hindu women and their families who have reported religiously motivated coercion, deception, and violence in the context of intimate relationships. Hinduphobia Tracker have documented a wide range of such incidents in great detail, often backed by police reports, victim accounts, and legal proceedings. These include cases of abduction, forced conversion, threats, and even murder when women resisted or attempted to escape. The common thread across these cases is that the targets are Hindu women, suggesting a pattern of religiously motivated targeting rather than isolated interpersonal disputes. Dismissing the entire phenomenon as fiction erases or belittles the trauma of the victims and their families. It delegitimises the suffering of Hindu women who have faced psychological abuse, religious coercion, and in some cases, extreme violence. This erasure also contributes to their ongoing marginalisation by fostering a climate of disbelief, mockery, and silence around their experiences. When the lived experiences of a religious community are systematically denied or ridiculed, it not only deepens their marginalisation but also emboldens perpetrators. Such denial allows religiously motivated hate crimes to continue unchecked. In this case, the refusal to acknowledge love jihad as a legitimate concern reflects a broader pattern of Hinduphobia, wherein concerns unique to the Hindu community are invalidated or caricatured. The author’s statement describes the Delhi riots, hate speech events, and increased communal violence as manifestations of a “Hindutva-driven political climate.” This interpretation contradicts the well-documented reality of the riots as a large-scale, organised attack specifically targeting Hindus. During the violence, Hindu individuals, homes, shops, and temples were deliberately attacked and destroyed, while properties owned by Muslims were largely left untouched. There were brutal incidents, including the murder and burning of Hindu victims, and many Hindu families were forced to flee or hide in fear for their lives. Several Hindus were brutally hacked during the Delhi riots of February 2020. One of the most harrowing cases detailed is that of 20-year-old Dilbar Singh Negi. On the evening of 24 February, Negi was attacked by a Muslim mob in Shahdara, Delhi. The rioters first brutally chopped off his limbs with a sword and then burnt him alive by tossing his mutilated body into a shop that had been set on fire. His family recounted that while they managed to escape the mob, they could not save him. Another case mentioned is that of 51-year-old Vinod Kumar, who was killed in the Brahmapuri area because his bike had a ‘Jai Shri Ram’ sticker. This incident led to widespread fear among Hindus, prompting many to remove religious markers from their vehicles and cut off their sacred threads to avoid being identified and targeted. Another incident, the brutality of which stood out, was that of Intelligence Bureau (IB) officer Ankit Sharma. He was brutally murdered during the riots, and his tortured remains were recovered from a nearby drain. According to his brother, Ankit Sharma was murdered by Tahir Hussain and a Muslim mob that was working under his command. Numerous similar incidents occurred throughout the violence, each marked by targeted brutality against Hindus and the systematic destruction of their homes, shops, and places of worship. The pattern of deliberate identification and attack, the advance preparation by the Muslim mob, and the widespread displacement and trauma suffered by Hindu families all point to a coordinated and large-scale campaign. These facts together clearly establish that the events were not random outbursts, but an organised anti-Hindu pogrom. By attributing the violence and hostility to Hindutva, the author reverses the roles of victim and aggressor, effectively blaming the Hindu community for the attacks it suffered. This misrepresentation amounts to a hate crime because it vilifies Hindus as the source of communal violence, disregarding clear evidence of their victimisation. Such a narrative distorts the facts and fosters communal division and prejudice, deepening hostility against Hindus. In doing so, the author’s statement promotes hatred and discrimination by falsely portraying Hindus as perpetrators rather than the victims of organised violence. The author, while presenting a critique of current political developments in India, repeatedly vilifies Hindutva by reducing it to a tool of “Hindu supremacy,” and links it directly to a wide range of alleged societal ills such as communal violence, hate speech, and marginalisation of minorities. 'Hindutva' is often used as a euphemism to make the targeting of Hindus more palatable. Hindutva is essentially a unifying ideology for Hindus which became imperative for Hindus to find and preserve their cultural identity which was being eroded and attacked due to Islamic invasions, British colonisation, Christian theological impositions and conversions. Hindutva is not a destructive ideology, as some attempt to portray, but one that is used as a unifying edifice for Hindus. Hindutva is also often used as a euphemism to target Hindus on the whole and their religious identity and faith. It is essentially semantic jugglery to confuse Hindus into believing that their own persecution by supremacists is somehow 'justified' because the specific victims espoused an ideology (Hindutva) which deserves the onslaught. The fact that the use of 'Hindutva' is merely to mask animosity towards Hindus was evident from the "Dismantling Global Hindutva" conference held in the USA, where speakers unabashedly spoke about how Hindutva and Hinduism are indistinguishable and therefore, the "dismantle Hindutva" one would have to "dismantle Hinduism". The practices of targeting Hindus and their religious and cultural identity and justifying that victimisation and dehumanisation by using euphemisms like "Hindutva" stems out of inherent animosity and hostility towards Hindus. Hence, this case is added to the hate crime database. The article, by dismissing the targeted exploitation of Hindu women as fiction and portraying the Delhi riots solely as a reaction to Hindu nationalism, erases the lived experiences and suffering of Hindu victims. It vilifies an entire community’s cultural and religious identity while justifying or ignoring violence committed against them. Such distortion of facts, inversion of victimhood, and promotion of hostility through selective narrative contribute to a climate of prejudice. For these reasons, the article goes beyond biased commentary—it reinforces harmful stereotypes, legitimises targeted hatred, and therefore qualifies as a form of hate speech against Hindus.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Christian Extremists
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
