Hindu family brutally attacked for opposing denigration of their faith by members of Muslim community

Case ID : d327236 | Location : Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh, India | Date of Incident : Sun, 18 January, 2026

Case ID : d327236

Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh, India

18 January, 2026

Hindu family brutally attacked for opposing denigration of their faith by members of Muslim community

Hate speech against Hindus

Anti-Hindu slurs, mocking faith

Mocking/denigrating Hindu leaders

Attack not resulting in death

Attacked for opposing radicals or trying to save victim

Case Summary

In the Baseda village of Muzaffarnagar district, Uttar Pradesh, Hindu religious sentiments were insulted after a Muslim youth named Fardeen made objectionable videos targeting the Hindu religion. Furthermore, when a Hindu man named Vishal Gupta opposed Fardeen's actions, he and his family were brutally assaulted by Fardeen and his Muslim friends. According to reports, the accused, Fardeen, was continuously making and posting objectionable videos targeting the Hindu religion and Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, a Hindu religious leader belonging to the Nath Sampradaya, on social media. When the Hindu man, Vishal Gupta, son of Mukesh Gupta, objected to this activity, Fardeen, along with Tayyab, son of Mahtab, Shakib, son of Babu, Mohammad Kaif alias Mithun, and several associates, entered Vishal Gupta’s house and launched a brutal assault on him and his family. During the attack, the victim was brutally beaten, while his wife and aunt were subjected to abuse and physical assault and sustained severe injuries. As the incident involved members of two communities, tensions escalated in the area, leading workers of a Hindu organisation to gather at Chhapar police station late at night on 19 January 2026. They organised a protest and demanded strict action against those involved. Acting on the complaint filed by the victim, Vishal Gupta, the police registered a case against five named individuals and around twenty unidentified persons. The station in charge, Mohit Sehrawat, stated that three accused, including Fardeen and Tayyab, were challaned for disturbing public peace, while further investigation was ongoing.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

The first primary category selected in this case is- 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. The other 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 second primary category selected here is - 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. This case has been added to the tracker because Hindu religious sentiments were insulted after a Muslim youth, Fardeen, made objectionable videos targeting the Hindu religion and CM Yogi Adityanath on social media. Following this, when a Hindu youth opposed this denigration of his faith, he and his family were subjected to brutal physical assault by Muslims. First, this incident clearly constitutes hate speech against the Hindu community by the Muslim perpetrator, involving deliberate and public expressions designed to insult and provoke the religious sentiments of the Hindu community. The derogatory remarks against the Hindu religion aimed to undermine Hindu beliefs, marking it as religiously motivated hate speech targeting the Hindu community. Hinduism stands as one of the world's most prominent faiths, embraced by millions of devotees globally, and denigrating its core beliefs constitutes a direct assault on the collective identity of its followers. Such targeted vilification reveals a malicious purpose to emotionally wound the Hindu community profoundly, rendering this a textbook instance of religiously motivated hate speech rooted in anti-Hindu hostility. When such remarks against Hinduism are made on social media, they instantly embolden others to follow suit, sparking a cascade of similar abuses that amplify hatred and animosity towards Hinduism and the Hindu community Secondly, the accused further denigrated a revered Hindu religious leader, Yogi Adityanath. He is not only the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh but also the head of the Gorakhnath Math, a Nath Sampradaya institution belonging to the Shaivite tradition of Hinduism. As a saffron-clad monk and religious leader, Yogi Adityanath represents the Hindu faith, its values, and its philosophy. Simultaneous targeting of the Hindu religion and CM Yogi Adityanath clearly demonstrates that the accused was targeting Yogi Adityanath not as a political figure, but as a Hindu religious icon. The accused’s comments were clearly motivated by his animosity towards Hinduism and its representatives. 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 is recognised as part of a broader pattern of Hinduphobia and religious hate crimes online. This deliberate targeting of revered religious icons firmly establishes this act as a hate-driven offence. Thirdly, when Vishal Gupta, a Hindu youth, decided to oppose the actions of the accused, the accused mobilised a Muslim group and carried out a violent attack on Vishal Gupta and his family inside their home. The attack was communal in nature and aimed at silencing resistance to their conduct. The violence and intimidation were rooted in collective religious hostility and were intended to punish a Hindu individual for objecting to objectionable actions carried out by members of the Muslim community. This incident reflected a dangerous mindset of religious supremacy that sought to impose dominance and enforce submission through violence. Vishal Gupta and his family were attacked solely because he chose to oppose the actions of the accused. This violent overreach stems from an Islamic supremacist ideology within Muslim circles, which views Hindus as socially and religiously inferior. Such toxic beliefs foster contempt and aggression, particularly when Hindus resist coercion, refuse to submit, or challenge the actions of Muslim individuals. The violence served as a warning intended to deter opposition and assert communal dominance through fear and force. Taken together, the deliberate targeting of Hindu religious beliefs, the denigration of a revered Hindu religious leader, and the subsequent communal violence against a Hindu family demonstrate a clear pattern of religiously motivated hostility. The progression from online hate speech to physical intimidation and assault underscores the religious animosity the accused held for the Hindu community. This case, therefore, meets the established criteria for inclusion in the hate crime database of the tracker. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records incidents based on when an event occurred or when the victim's ordeal began. It is important to clarify that none of the media sources covering this case has specified the exact date when the accused made those objectionable videos. Therefore, for documentation purposes, we have recorded the date as 19 January 2026, the day when members of Hindu organisations organised a protest.