Minor Hindu boy brutally assaulted by Muslim mob for seeking justice for the killing of Hindu man in Bangladesh, Hindu homes and temple targeted

Case ID : d326e21 | Location : Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India | Date of Incident : Sun, 28 December, 2025

Case ID : d326e21

Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India

28 December, 2025

Minor Hindu boy brutally assaulted by Muslim mob for seeking justice for the killing of Hindu man in Bangladesh, Hindu homes and temple targeted

Attack not resulting in death

Attacked for opposing radicals or trying to save victim

Attacked for Hindu identity

Communal clash/attack

Attacked to induce migration from non-Hindu dominated area

Hate speech against Hindus

Violent threats

Attack on Hindu religious representations

Attack on Temples

Case Summary

In the Kalana village of Sanand taluka, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, communal tensions escalated after a minor Hindu boy, along with his father, was brutally assaulted by a Muslim mob for sharing a story on social media seeking justice for the killing of the Hindu man, Dipu Chandra Das, by Muslim men in Bangladesh. This escalated into a one-sided communal attack by the Muslim community in which Hindu homes were selectively targeted and stoned, resulting in heightened tensions in the area. According to reports, the minor Hindu boy had posted a story on social media seeking justice for the killing of Dipu Chandra Das, who was killed by a Muslim mob after falsely accusing him of blasphemy in Bangladesh. This enraged the Muslim community in the area, who declared that only one Hindu was burnt in Bangladesh, and if such stories were posted, the entire Thakorvas Hindu locality would be set on fire. Furthermore, the Muslim community also brutally assaulted the minor victim and his father. This escalated the communal tensions in the area, and on the night of 29 December 2025, members of the Muslim community began stone-pelting, resulting in a targeted attack on Hindu homes, vehicles and a temple, with stones hurled from rooftops. This caused substantial damage to property, including shattered vehicle windows and punctured tiled roofs. The violence resumed again on the morning of 30 December 2025, indicating continuation rather than an isolated clash, and created an atmosphere of fear, forcing many Hindu residents to flee their homes. The accused, fearing repercussions, left their homes and hid in nearby fields, where they were later apprehended. The police registered an FIR (First Information Report) based on the complaint by the minor victim and booked 22 members of the Muslim community, including a man identified as Shahrukh. A case has been initiated at the Sanand GIDC (Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation) police station under sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 189(2), 191(2), 190, 194(2), 324(2) and 125(A) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and began further investigation. Subsequently, 42 individuals were taken into custody in connection with the incident. Police maintained a heavy presence in the area to prevent further escalation.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category of - Attack not resulting in death. Within it, the sub-category selected is - Attacked for opposing radicals or trying to save victim. In several cases, Hindus are attacked for opposing religiously motivated crimes being committed against a fellow Hindu or simply for voicing an opinion opposing radical elements, who either have in the past or continue to persecute Hindus. In such cases, the initial attack against the victim, against which the Hindu was trying to defend the victim, would also need to be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime. Since the initial crime itself was religiously motivated and the subsequent crime of attempting to save the victim or speaking against the radical elements ends up inviting a violent attack, it would also be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime under this category. The other sub-category selected here is - Attacked for Hindu identity. In several cases, Hindus are attacked merely for their Hindu identity without any perceived provocation. A classic example of this category of religiously motivated hate crime is a murder in 2016. 7 ISIS terrorists were convicted for shooting a school principal in Kanpur because they got ‘triggered’ seeing the Kalava on his wrist and tilak that he had put. In this, the Hindu victim had offered no provocation except for his Hindu religious identity. The motivation for the murder was purely religious, driven by religious supremacy. Such cases where Hindus are targeted merely for their religious identity would be documented as a hate crime under this category. The other sub-category selected here is - Communal clash/attack. Communal clash is a form of collective violence that involves clashes between groups belonging to different religious identities. For a communal clash between Hindus and non-Hindus to qualify as a religiously motivated hate crime, the trigger of the violence itself would have to be anti-Hindu in essence. For example, if there is a Hindu religious procession that comes under attack from a non-Hindu mob and after the initial attack, Hindus retaliate in self-defence, leading to a communal clash between the two religious communities. While at a later stage, both communities are involved in the clash/violence, the initial trigger of the violence was by the non-Hindu mob against the Hindus and therefore, it could safely be termed as an anti-Hindu violence. Further, the trigger would also have to be religiously motivated. In the cited example, the attack by the non-Hindu mob was against religious processions and therefore, can be concluded to be religiously motivated. In some cases, the trigger may be non-religious, however, it develops into religious violence against Hindus at a later stage. In such cases too, the foundational animosity towards Hindus becomes the motivating factor of the crime and therefore, it would be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime against Hindus under this category. Another sub-category selected is- Attacked to induce migration from non-Hindu dominated area. There have been cases where the Hindus living in an area, often with a majority dwelling belonging to non-Hindus or those harbouring animosity towards the Hindu faith, the Hindu residents experience threats and violence. The violence is employed with the aim of making the Hindus leave the area and relocate, so the area could be turned into an exclusive ghetto for adherents of the non-Hindu faith or those who harbor animosity towards the Hindu faith. In several cases, the aim of exodus is explicit. However, in several cases, the demand for exodus of Hindu residents is not explicit, however, violence by non-Hindu residents leaves the Hindu residents no option but to leave the area, thereby, turning the area into an exclusive ghetto of non-Hindu residents. In such cases, there are instances violence against the Hindu residents explicitly. For example, in the Hauz Qazi case of 2019, the Muslim residents claimed that mob violence against the Hindu residents had been triggered by a parking dispute. However, the violence did turn religious with a temple being desecrated and was directed specifically against the Hindu residents. The Hindu residents of the area were clear that the violence was religiously motivated and one of the motives was to affect an exodus of the Hindu residents. In such cases, even though the perpetrators have not explicitly expressed the aim of affecting exodus, the given circumstances and violence and precedent point to the intention of exodus and therefore would be categorized under this sub-category. Such crimes are religiously motivated and therefore are hate crimes. The second primary category selected here is - Hate speech against Hindus. Within it, the sub-categories selected here 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 primary category selected here is - Attack on Hindu religious representations. Within it, the sub-category selected here is - Attack on temples. In Hinduism, a temple is the abode of the Deity. The Deity in the Temple is consecrated, thereby, making it a real, breathing entity. Hindus believe that not just the Deity but the temple premises itself are sacred to Hindus since Hindus hold the faith that the entire Temple space is an amalgamation of the divine energy of the deity. Given the central significance of Temples in Hindu Dharma, any attack against a Hindu Temple or its peripheral premises is an attack on the faith itself and is born out of animosity towards the faith, of which, the Temple is a central tenet. Any manner of attack against a Temple and/or its premises would therefore be considered a religiously motivated hate crime. This case has been added to the tracker because a minor Hindu boy was brutally assaulted by a Muslim mob for sharing a story on social media seeking justice for the killing of a Hindu man in Bangladesh. The violence by members of the Muslim community was directed against Hindus as a collectivity and was rooted in hostility towards Hindu identity, expression, and solidarity with persecuted Hindus in Bangladesh. The sequence of events demonstrated that the assault on a minor Hindu boy, the threats issued to the Hindu locality, and the subsequent stone-pelting were not the result of a personal dispute or a spontaneous altercation but arose from religious animosity and ideological resentment. It is important to note here that a fresh wave of anti-Hindu violence prevailed across Bangladesh following the death of Sharif Osman Bin Hadi. This escalation occurred against the backdrop of ongoing anti-Hindu violence that had persisted since the ouster of the Sheikh Hasina government in August 2024. In the aftermath of Hadi’s death, Hindu homes were selectively targeted and set ablaze in multiple localities by Muslim mobs, forcing families to flee and rendering many homeless. The violence was not sporadic but patterned, with Muslim mobs targeting Hindu neighbourhoods, properties, and religious symbols with impunity. One of the many victims of this wave of violence was a Hindu man named Dipu Chandra Das, who was brutally lynched by a Muslim mob over false allegations of blasphemy. The minor Hindu boy was specifically targeted after he shared a social media story seeking justice for the killing of Dipu Chandra Das in Bangladesh. The reaction to this post was not limited to verbal disagreement but escalated into a physical attack and violent threats against the entire Hindu locality. These statements reflected an attempt to intimidate and silence Hindu voices who stood in solidarity and to punish them for supporting Hindus facing persecution outside India. The assault on the minor victim and his father further demonstrated that the hostility was directed at their Hindu identity rather than any personal grievance. The use of physical violence against a child and his family served as a means of enforcing fear and submission. This was meant to be a statement to the entire Hindu community that any expression of solidarity for the Hindu cause would result in similar violence against them. Furthermore, this situation escalated into a one-sided communal attack by members of the Muslim community against Hindu homes, vehicles and a temple, with stones being hurled from rooftops. The scale, coordination and continuation of the violence to the next day demonstrated that the attack was premeditated rather than a spontaneous occurrence. This forced many Hindu residents to flee their homes, underscoring the intensity and the targeted nature of the attack, with the intention of terrorising the Hindu population of the village. It is pertinent to note that Muslim extremists harbour specific animosity towards Hindus and their faith and also view India as a Hindu collectivity. The very basis of the partition of India was that Muslims believed that Islam was a nation unto itself, which could not survive with a Hindu collectivity like India. Therefore, the Muslim community reacted with aggression towards the victim for seeking justice for the death of Dipu Chandra Das, indicating that the resentment was towards Hindu solidarity and consciousness. During the stone pelting, a Hindu temple was also attacked. In the Hindu faith, temples are not mere physical structures, but sanctified spaces believed to embody the living presence of the deity. Thus, acts of violence against such spaces are not isolated incidents of destruction but reflect underlying hostility towards Hindu beliefs and identity. Such an attack is therefore not only material but also symbolic, striking at the Hindu faith itself. Taken together, the deliberate targeting of a Hindu minor for expressing concern over Hindu persecution, the explicit threats against a Hindu neighbourhood, the physical assaults on Hindu individuals, and the organised stone-pelting against Hindu homes and a temple established a clear pattern of anti-Hindu hostility. The violence functioned as a tool to suppress Hindu expression, deter solidarity with persecuted Hindus, and assert communal dominance through fear. Since the offence was driven by religious hostility and aimed at silencing and intimidating Hindus as a group, this incident has been added to the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker. Disclaimer on victim count: The victim count in this case has been recorded as two, reflecting the Hindu boy and his father, who were physically assaulted in the initial incident that triggered the subsequent violence. This count is limited to individuals who were directly identified in reports as victims of physical assault with clear attribution. Although the incident later escalated into a large-scale communal attack in which multiple Hindu homes, properties, and a temple were targeted by a Muslim mob, the available reporting does not provide verified identities or precise numbers of additional Hindu individuals who suffered direct bodily harm. In the absence of confirmed victim-level data for those affected during the broader communal violence, the tracker has conservatively recorded only the two clearly identified victims. The wider attack on Hindu homes, the temple, and the locality has been documented separately under property damage, threats, and attacks on religious representations. Should further verified information emerge identifying additional Hindu individuals who were physically assaulted or injured during the mob violence, the victim count will be reviewed and updated accordingly.