Hindus targeted with beheading threats by Muslim man in support of “I Love Muhammad” trend
Mumbai, Maharashtra, India 
1 October, 2025
Case Summary
Hindus were targeted with violent beheading threats from a Muslim man named Nadeem, who posted a provocative video on social media related to the “I Love Muhammad” controversy. According to reports, the accused, a resident of Budhana who was living in Mumbai for work, shared a video in which he declared, “iske uppar gardan kat bhi skte hai aur katwa bhi skte hai” (we can slit/behead/kill people over this issue). He then boasted and gave his address while threatening Hindus, saying, “jisko jo krna hai krlo” (do whatever you want). Nadeem filmed the video from Mumbai and circulated it online. The video spread widely, creating resentment and tension in Budhana and the surrounding areas. Following the incident, Sub-Inspector Nandkishore Kaushik of Budhana police station filed a complaint, and Rural Superintendent of Police Aditya Bansal confirmed that a case was registered against the accused, who was subsequently arrested. This incident did not emerge in isolation but forms part of a larger pattern of organised agitation by Muslims across India, centred on the “I Love Muhammad” campaign. The campaign itself arose from a controversy deliberately misrepresented by Muslim groups. On 5th September 2025, violence broke out in Rawatpur, Kanpur, during a Barawafat procession, when Muslims attacked and defaced Hindu posters. This followed a complaint by Hindus, in which police removed an “I Love Muhammad” poster that had been fixed on the Ram Navami gate on 4th September 2025. An FIR was then lodged against Muslims for vandalising Hindu posters, but they twisted the narrative, claiming that police action had been taken against Muslims merely for putting up “I Love Muhammad” posters. This distortion became the rallying cry for Muslims to organise protests and violence across several districts. Slogans such as “Sar Tan Se Juda” were raised in rallies, and Hindus, as well as police personnel, were attacked. Therefore, this case is not an isolated outburst but a continuation of an orchestrated campaign of intimidation and violence, openly challenging law and order while asserting Islamic supremacy.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category of - Hate speech against Hindus. Within it, the sub-category 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. This case cannot be examined in isolation; it belongs to a wider sequence of events that began with anti-Hindu aggression and efforts to incite communal tension. The backdrop of this controversy lies in the circulation of provocative material related to the “I Love Muhammad” incident, which had already created resentment in several areas. The “I Love Muhammad” campaign, started in Kanpur, was not merely a display of religious pride but an assertion of Islamic supremacy, accompanied by intimidation and violence against Hindus. Across the country, Hindus were threatened, temples attacked, and mobs raised chilling slogans such as “Sar tan se juda,” threatening beheadings. In Bareilly, the FIR described how a Muslim crowd, mobilised under the “I Love Muhammad” banner, armed themselves with petrol bombs, stones, country-made firearms, and sharp weapons to attack security forces and intimidate Hindus. Seen in the context of the wider “I Love Muhammad” campaign, the video posted by Nadeem constitutes clear hate speech directed at Hindus. The violent threat, “iske uppar gardan kat bhi skte hai” (we can slit, behead, or kill people over this issue), is essentially a beheading threat against Hindus, comparable to slogans like “Sar tan se juda.” “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 the Prophet. Though a radical Muslim outfit in Pakistan coined the 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, 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 Hindu and Christian families by levelling fabricated charges of blasphemy against them, which causes outrage and paints a target behind them. The underlying hatred and animosity toward non-Muslims, especially Hindus, drive these false blasphemy accusations as a means to subjugate and victimise them. Therefore, the perpetrator's open threat demonstrates a deliberate intent to target and intimidate the Hindu community. Nadeem’s actions were not casual or personal; they targeted the Hindu community as a whole, reflecting deep-seated religious hostility. In recent times, social media has increasingly become a platform for anti-Hindu hate, with derogatory memes, videos, and messages targeting Hindu religious symbols, practices, and deities. Such content forms part of a broader pattern of Hinduphobia and religiously motivated hate crimes online. This deliberate targeting of revered religious icons firmly establishes the accused’s actions as a religiously motivated hate crime; therefore, it is being categorised under the hate crime database. This case meets all the parameters of religiously motivated hate speech: targeted verbal abuse, direct threats of violence, and public intimidation based on religion. It is therefore being added to the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records the incident based on when the victim’s ordeal began, or when the event occurred. Since the video was posted on 2 October 2025, thus, the date of the incident has been selected as 2 October 2025. Since the video was posted from Mumbai, the place of the incident has been recorded as such.
Case Status
Arrested
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
