Anti-Hindu speech: Muslim cleric makes derogatory remarks against Hindus amidst chants of "I Love Muhammad" by Muslim crowd
Pilibhit, Uttar Pradesh, India 
2 October, 2025
Case Summary
In Pilibhit district, Uttar Pradesh, an anti-Hindu speech was delivered by a Muslim cleric named Maulana Rehan Reza Khan. He made objectionable remarks against the Hindu community before a gathering of Muslims, which also included minors. According to media reports, a video of this cleric went viral after Friday prayers (Jummah) in Nazirganj village, under the Sehramau North Police Station area. In the footage, he was seen making inflammatory and offensive comments about Hindus. The video showed Maulana Rehan Reza Khan inciting Muslims and children. During his speech, the cleric stated, “Even if there are eighty crore people (Hindus) in front of us, they are at our feet.” Following this, Bajrang Dal District President Sanjay Mishra strongly objected to the statement, describing it as an attempt to spread communal hatred. He demanded the cleric’s immediate arrest. After the video spread widely, many members of the Hindu community reached Puranpur Police Station to demand strict action against the cleric. Consequently, the police registered a First Information Report (FIR) against Maulana Rehan Reza Khan. The case was filed for hurting religious sentiments, making objectionable remarks, and under relevant sections of the Information Technology (IT) Act. The Inspector-in-Charge of Sehramau North Police Station stated that the cyber cell was investigating the video. At the time of writing this report, the search for the cleric was ongoing. 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 was following a complaint by Hindus, where 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 the police action was taken against Muslims for merely putting up “I Love Muhammad” posters. This distortion became the rallying cry for Muslims to organise protests and violence across several districts. Slogans of “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, 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- Hate Speech against Hindus. The subcategory 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. This case cannot be examined in isolation; it belongs to a wider sequence of events that began with anti-Hindu aggression. The backdrop of this controversy lies in the incident of 4–5 September 2025, when, during a Barawafat procession in Rawatpur, Kanpur, Muslims vandalised Hindu posters and banners. Following this, a complaint was filed by Hindus, and action was taken against rioting Muslims. A day earlier, police had removed an “I Love Muhammad” poster that had been illegally fixed on the Ram Navami gate. The FIR was lodged against Muslims for vandalising Hindu religious posters. However, this straightforward case of vandalism was deliberately distorted by Muslims, who portrayed themselves as victims and claimed that police action had been taken only because they displayed “I Love Muhammad” posters. This misrepresentation was not incidental but calculated, for it became the rallying point for widespread mobilisation across Uttar Pradesh and beyond. In the weeks that followed, Muslims organised rallies and agitations where lethal slogans such as “Sar Tan Se Juda” were openly raised. These slogans are not symbolic protests but direct calls for beheading, a form of religiously sanctioned violence. Hindus were attacked in several places, temples were desecrated, and even police attempting to maintain order were assaulted. This incident in Pilibhit, Uttar Pradesh, was a clear case of religiously motivated hate speech against Hindus. Maulana Rehan Reza Khan’s statement that “even if there are eighty crore Hindus in front of us, they are at our feet” was deeply derogatory and exposed entrenched religious hostility towards the Hindu community. By framing Hindus as inferior and promoting dominance over them, he revealed deep-seated animosity rooted in anti-Hindu bigotry and a sense of Islamic supremacy. His remarks were deliberate and intended to demean an entire religious group, thereby inciting resentment and hostility among Muslims towards Hindus. The accused delivered these remarks before a Muslim crowd that included minor children, deliberately targeting impressionable minds. This gathering, comprising members of his own community, became a platform for open indoctrination. By exposing young Muslims to inflammatory and derogatory rhetoric against Hindus, the cleric sought to instil enmity and prejudice from an early age. Such deliberate exposure fosters generational hatred, ensuring that communal animosity is transmitted through religious and social conditioning. His use of divisive and inflammatory language further created a mindset of permanent opposition and hatred towards Hindus based solely on their religious identity. This hate speech was rooted in the teachings of the Islamic theology that promotes contempt for non-Muslims, particularly Hindus, owing to historic religious conflicts. In the context of the “I Love Muhammad” incident—which was overtly anti-Hindu in tone and impact—the hatred expressed in this case became even more pronounced. The use of the slogan “I Love Muhammad” in an aggressive and confrontational manner heightened tensions and revealed that such incidents are not isolated. Both the Pilibhit hate speech and the “I Love Muhammad” aggression form part of a recurring pattern of organised and religiously motivated hostility against Hindus. It underlines that Maulana Rehan Reza Khan’s remarks were not spontaneous personal opinions but expressions of an ideological agenda aimed at demeaning and provoking Hindus. Given these circumstances, this incident qualifies as a clear case of religiously motivated hate speech. It was consciously crafted and publicly delivered to incite hatred and antagonism against Hindus, rooted in religious intolerance and directed even at minors. Hence, this incident is being recorded in the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker.
Case Status
Complaint registered
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
