Maulvi conspires to kill Nupur Sharma and several other Hindu leaders for 'blasphemy', doctors images of Hindu deities
Surat, Gujarat, India 
3 May, 2024
Case Summary
Gujarat Police arrested Sohail Abu Bakar Timol, a 27-year-old Maulvi from Surat, on charges of conspiring to assassinate individuals he considered "gustakh" (blasphemers), including Nupur Sharma, former Bharatiya Janata Party spokesperson, T Raja Singh, Suresh Chavhanke, a BJP MLA and Sudarshan News editor-in-chief, and Updesh Rana, Sanatan Sangh national chairman as well as social media activist. Sohail, originally from Nandurbar, Maharashtra, worked as a Hafiz at a madrasa in Surat and managed a thread factory in Diamond Nagar. Investigations revealed Sohail's communication with handlers in Pakistan and Nepal, identified as Shahzad in Nepal, through a SIM card from Laos. He was instructed to "straighten out" those defaming the Prophet Muhammad, with a promised reward of Rs 1 crore for their murders. Sohail also operated a WhatsApp group with members spanning from Indonesia to Kazakhstan, where radical ideologies were shared, and offensive remarks about Hinduism were made. Additionally, he was found altering images of India's flag and posting maliciously doctored images of Hindu gods and goddesses. Sohail referred to the 6th of December (Babri demolition) as “Black Day.” Furthermore, Sohail was in the process of procuring weapons through foreign handlers but was apprehended by the Surat Crime Branch before executing his plan. He faces charges under various sections of the IPC and the Information Technology Act. Sohail's affinity for Owaisi, admiration of Hamas, and fanhood of Salman Khan were uncovered during the investigation.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
According to the details, this case has been placed under three prime categories of the hate tracker. The first is- Attack not resulting in death. Under this, the sub-category selected is- Attacked for "Blasphemy"- Blasphemy essentially refers to the desecration of anything which is held sacred/holy to a group of people. However, for religious supremacist groups, the elements of ‘blasphemy’ are ever-changing, shifting and expanding – leading to infringement on the rights of other religious groups, freedom of speech and expression, threats and even physical violence. There are instances where blasphemy is also used as a dog whistle to target Hindus owing to intrinsic animosity towards Hinduism. There are several instances where stating truths as mentioned in the non-Hindu doctrine itself has led to unmitigated violence against Hindus. There have also been instances where non-Hindus have themselves created a ‘blasphemous’ situation, like placing a Quran in a temple, to use it as an excuse to attack Hindus. Essentially, Blasphemy charges are often made up and/or are used to shut down any form of criticism of non-Hindu faiths and as a tool to target Hindus. Any physical violence over Blasphemy charges against Hindus are foundationally based on animosity for Hindus and their faith owing to religious supremacist ideologies, therefore, such attacks would be documented as religious motivated hate crimes under this category. The second prime category under which this case has placed is- Attack on Hindu religious symbols. Under this, two sub-categories have been chosen. The first 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. The second sub-category under the above-mentioned prime category 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. The third prime category under which this case has been placed is- Attack on Hindu religious symbols. Under this, the sub-category selected is- Iconoclastic representation of Hindu Gods/Goddesses- An icon is a symbol of someone or something that is revered, or a religious representation of a spiritual ideal. Iconography is of vital significance in the Hindu milieu. It helps connect people’s spiritual beliefs with the real world. Iconography within the Hindu faith takes several shapes and forms. Murtis are of most significance to Hindus, to which daily rituals, prayers and offerings are done. Besides the murtis, there are several other symbols which have deep significance in the Hindu faith – the Om and Swastika for example. Any iconoclastic representation of these symbols, images and murtis is an affront to the religious beliefs and faith of the Hindu community itself since the symbols and icons are deeply religious in nature. In this sub-category of crime, we would record hate crimes and iconoclastic representations, in words, art, or any other form of representations of symbols that hold religious significance for the Hindu community. Since these symbols, icons and murtis are central to the Hindu faith, any iconoclastic representation of these symbols is born out of animosity towards the faith itself, manifesting itself through these symbols and therefore, these representations would be considered religiously motivated hated crimes. This case involving Sohail Abu Bakar Timol exemplifies a religiously motivated hate crime through several key dimensions. Firstly, Sohail's plot to assassinate individuals he deemed "blasphemers"—such as Nupur Sharma and others. As seen in several cases, the Blasphemy law is often used as a tool of oppression and violence, leading to false accusations, mob justice, and social ostracization of Hindus by Islamists. This law, which is sparingly used in Muslim-majority countries like Pakistan and Bangladesh to attack minority Hindus residing there, has become increasingly common in India too, where bloodthirsty Islamists often twist and use these laws to settle their scores with Hindus The misuse of blasphemy laws against Hindus is often motivated by religious prejudice. Hindus are targeted because of their religious identity. It is further important to note here that Nupur Sharma had only quoted an excerpt from the Islamic Hadith during a TV show in response to an insult to Lord Shiv by a Muslim panellist. The video of her remark was then selectively shared by Mohammad Zubair, the co-founder of AltNews. This led to threats at Sharma and attacks on those who supported her. Thereafter, Muslims executed, attacked, and threatened several people for supporting Nupur Sharma. Here too, the Muslim cleric was conspiring to assassinate individuals like Nupur Sharma. Additionally, he mocked Hindu faith through offensive doctored images of Hindu gods and goddesses, reflecting a deliberate attempt to denigrate and insult Hindu religious symbols. Furthermore, his actions reflected an iconoclastic representation of Hindu deities, showcasing a deliberate intent to demean and attack religious symbols that hold significant value to Hindus. Lastly, the violent threats issued to "straighten out" those he deemed as defaming the Prophet Muhammad further exemplify the extremism underlying this case, demonstrating a willingness to resort to murder to silence opposition. Collectively, these elements highlight the dangerous intersection of radical ideology and targeted violence, firmly categorizing this incident as a religiously motivated hate crime.
Victim Details
Total Victim
3
Deceased
0
Gender
- Male 2
- Female 1
- Third Gender 0
- Unknown 0
Caste
- SC/ST 0
- OBC 0
- General 3
- Unknown 0
Age Group
- Minor 0
- Adult 3
- Senior Citizen 0
- Unknown 0
Case Status
Arrested
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
