Attack on Hindu sentiments: Muslim man hails Islamic tyrant and denigrates revered Hindu king on social media

Case ID : c7b8ba8 | Location : Yavatmal, Maharashtra, India | Date of Incident : Sat, 13 May, 2023

Case ID : c7b8ba8

Yavatmal, Maharashtra, India

13 May, 2023

Attack on Hindu sentiments: Muslim man hails Islamic tyrant and denigrates revered Hindu king on social media

Hate speech against Hindus

Mocking/denigrating Hindu leaders

Case Summary

On 14 May 2023, a derogatory video denigrating revered Hindu king Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj of the Maratha Empire was posted on social media by a Muslim man named Sheikh Aftab Shiekh Mannan. According to media reports, the Maharashtra Police initiated legal action against Sheikh Aftab on the following day, 15 May 2023, for uploading a Muslim extremist propaganda video on social media during Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj's birth anniversary. The video depicted Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj bowing down to Aurangzeb, captioned "Aurangzeb Hindustan ka Baap" (Aurangzeb, father of Hindustan). The incident occurred in the Pusad region of Yavatmal district, Maharashtra. One Hindu man named Gajanan Chavhan filed a complaint, stating that the video intentionally offended Hindu sentiments and potentially incited communal tensions. Mahesh Saroshe, one of Chavhan's associates involved in filing the complaint, mentioned that Chavhan had gone into hiding since lodging the complaint. The police, instead of apprehending Aftab, sought Chavhan and his associates. Additionally, a First Information Report was filed against Mahesh Saroshe and Ganesh Bokshe by a Muslim man named Mohammed Mobin Sheikh Mujammel for insulting Aurangzeb by praising Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. Saroshe explained that their response video was prompted by Aftab's inflammatory content. Despite Aftab's absconding, Saroshe and Bokshe faced legal action, highlighting a perceived double standard in the treatment of cases. The police charged Aftab, Mahesh Saroshe and Ganesh Bokshe under sections pertaining to promoting enmity between groups and insulting religious beliefs.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

The primary category selected in this case is- Hate Speech against Hindus. The subcategory selected is- Mocking/denigrating Hindu leaders. 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. Religious leaders are often seen as representatives of the community, especially, the community’s religious faith and beliefs. Mocking or denigrating a religious leader specifically owing to his religious identity and/or the religious rituals he observes can be considered hate speech because the motivating factor of the speech is animosity and/or dislike for what he represents – the religious beliefs and faith of the community. It is important to note that mere insulting words against an individual do not constitute hate speech. It is entirely possible that insulting words are used for an individual, however, the specific speech is not the result of religious hate and/or animosity towards the professed faith of the religious leader, but the individual himself. For the speech to be considered hate speech, the speech itself or the motivating factor behind the speech has to be religious in nature. Such speech which denigrates Hindu religious leaders specifically owing to animosity towards the faith they profess and the community faith they represent will be treated as hate speech under this category. The incident was a direct case of anti-Hindu hate speech. By glorifying Aurangzeb, the Muslim accused invoked a historical figure remembered for massacring Hindus, forcibly converting lakhs of them, and destroying temples. Elevating such a tyrant is not an act of historical discourse; it was a deliberate endorsement of persecution and genocide against Hindus due to their faith. To praise a figure synonymous with violence and oppression against a religious community was to express open hostility towards that community. This action represented clear religious animosity, intended not only to provoke but also to offend Hindus by recalling their historical suffering. The offence did not end there. The accused further attempted to humiliate the Hindu community by denigrating Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, one of the most revered kings in Hindu history. Shivaji Maharaj is widely respected as a protector of the Hindu faith, the Maratha kingdom, and a resolute leader who fought against the Islamic tyrants of his time. By portraying him in a subservient posture before Aurangzeb, the accused mocked his legacy and insulted the collective pride of the Hindu community. This deliberate distortion was intended to wound religious feelings, belittle a religious icon, and ridicule a figure venerated as a symbol of Hindu resistance and sovereignty. Additionally, the fact that this incident occurred on Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj's birth anniversary rendered the religious and premeditated nature of the crime even clearer. The timing of the denigration struck on a day when Hindus revered and honoured him and his legacy with profound devotion. To insult such a revered king on this sacred occasion elevated the severity of the crime. Both these actions, glorifying Islamic tyrant Aurangzeb and denigrating Shivaji Maharaj, when taken together, established a pattern of deliberate hate expression. On one hand, the accused glorified a figure who represented the persecution of Hindus, and on the other, he humiliated a king revered for defending Hindu civilisation. Such speech was not benign provocation, but rather a calculated insult aimed squarely at the Hindu community, its beliefs, and its icons. This incident was not just offensive content on social media; it was religiously motivated hate speech against Hindus. Therefore, this case is being added to the hate crime database.