Hindu Gods and Goddesses targeted and abused in social media post, Sidhauli, UP
Sitapur, Uttar Pradesh, India 
20 January, 2026
Case Summary
Hindu Gods repeatedly targeted and mocked by the accused, Vikas Gautam, in social media posts, UP. The accused apologised. In Sidhauli, Uttar Pradesh, a young man, resident of Narottam Nagar, Vikas Gautam, repeatedly posted derogatory posts and objectionable videos against Hindu gods and goddesses. The Rashtriya Hindu Sher Sena filed a written complaint in this matter at the Sidhauli police station. Kamal Hindu, the organisation’s Assembly in-charge, stated in a letter to the police that the accused, Vikas Gautum, was repeatedly posting content that hurt religious sentiments and threatened to incite social tension. Following the complaint, Sidhauli police summoned Vikas Gautam to the police station. The Sidhauli police stated that the accused confessed to the offence of posting derogatory comments and apologised in writing. They also stated that the accused admitted his mistake through a video and promised not to post anything objectionable in the future.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The 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 from 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 was added to the tracker because the accused, Vikas Gautam, circulated objectionable videos on social media that used abusive and derogatory language against Hindu deities. The content was a direct attack on Hindu religious symbols in a public digital space, aimed at ridiculing and humiliating the Hindu faith and provoking believers. The repeated nature of the abuse indicated deliberate targeting rather than a momentary lapse or casual provocation. Hindu deities are central objects of reverence, so degrading them functions as hate speech by attacking the core of Hindu religious identity and fostering a hostile environment for Hindus. Although the accused later apologised, an apology issued after police action does not undo the harm of the original posts or negate the evident contempt expressed toward Hindu beliefs. The incident also aligns with a wider pattern of online Hinduphobia where social media is used to circulate content that mocks and vilifies Hindu deities and practices. For these reasons, the case is recorded as a hate incident targeting Hindus and Hindu religious beliefs. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker recorded incident dates based on when a crime occurred rather than when it was reported by the media. In this case, media reports did not specify the date of the offence; therefore, the media reporting date of 21 January 2026 was used as the indicative incident date for documentation purposes.
Case Status
Complaint filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Others
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
