Casteist abuses hurled, saffron flag torn as Kanwariyas attacked by armed Muslim mob for expressing Hindu faith
Prayagraj (Allahabad), Uttar Pradesh, India 
17 July, 2025
Case Summary
In the Sarai Khwaja village of Prayagraj, a group of Kanwariyas were subjected to a brutal attack by a Muslim mob, which used swords, sticks, and stones, and hurled casteist abuses at the pilgrims. The saffron flag was also torn. The violence erupted following a minor scuffle over the playing of devotional music on a DJ system during the procession. The Kanwar Yatra procession was moving peacefully through a Muslim-majority area, accompanied by devotional music played over loudspeakers. As the procession passed in front of a mosque where Friday prayers were underway, members of the Muslim community objected to the sound of the DJ. This led to a heated altercation, which quickly escalated into violence. A large group of Muslim men came out of the mosque, surrounded the Kanwariyas, and launched a coordinated attack. The mob assaulted the devotees with swords, sticks, and stones. Several Kanwariyas, including women, were severely beaten and subjected to caste-based slurs. A saffron flag carried by the pilgrims was torn during the assault. Multiple participants sustained injuries in the attack. One of the victims, Mahendra Kumar, submitted a written complaint at the local police station, naming 15 individuals: Tauheed, Yamin, Tasleem, Raju, Mohammad Sahil, Abrar, Sahlad, Tufail Ahmed, Kallu, Sudan Ahmed, Zeeshan, Garjur Sai, Mohammad Tausif, Mohammad Danish, and Mohammad Salman, along with approximately 50 unidentified assailants. In his statement, Mahendra Kumar confirmed that the attackers were armed with swords and had surrounded the procession with the intent to obstruct the peaceful conduct of the yatra. He emphasised that the assault appeared to be pre-planned. Police registered an FIR and detained three individuals. The investigation was ongoing. Additional police forces were deployed in the area to maintain law and order. The Kanwariyas were later escorted safely from the village and allowed to continue their journey.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker un the primary category of - Attack not resulting in death. The sub-category selected is - Attack against Hindu devotees. Hindu devotees are a few of the easiest targets of religiously motivated hate crimes because during the festival/procession/puja etc, for non-Hindus it is easy to profile their victims on the basis of religion. Hindu devotees come under attack on several occasions by individual non-Hindus or mobs of non-Hindus owing to their animosity against Hinduism, its symbols and tradition/practices. There are several instances of Hindu devotees being attacked while they worship in temples or temporary religious structures, during religious processions, doing bhajan/kirtan/puja in their own homes, in the residential society etc. These attacks are perpetrated by non-Hindus primarily because of their animosity towards Hindus and their faith. In some cases, the trigger for the violence may be non-religious, however, there are two elements that make these hate crimes. First, the Hindus who come under attack are attacked violently while indulging in religious activity. Whether they are in a place of worship or not is immaterial to the crime. When individuals are attacked while indulging in religious practices, the attack in itself is a hindrance to their freedom to practice religion and therefore constitutes a hate crime. Secondly, religious supremacist doctrines and ideologies deem religious practices of Hindus to be offensive ab initio since they are considered “sinful” by these ideologies, worthy to be annihilated by force or coercion. Driven by these religious supremacist ideologies and doctrines, the attacks against Hindu devotees stem from intrinsic animosity towards Hinduism. In some cases, the trigger for the violence may be non-religious, however, it develops into a religiously motivated crime during the course of the violence. Since these attacks stem from animosity towards Hindus and Hinduism, they are considered religiously motivated hate crimes under this category. The second sub-category selected is - Attack on religious procession. The outward celebration and display of religious symbols in an intrinsic part of Hinduism. Religious processions on various festivals are age-old traditions and a way to manifest faith and form a part of the religious practices of Hindus. On several occasions, such religious processions come under attack by non-Hindu mobs, in a manifestation of their animosity towards Hinduism and their practices. The reasons cited for such violent attacks are many and range from crossing a non-Hindu resident-dominated area to playing loud music, crossing from an area where there is a religious structure of another faith etc. The violent attacks are triggered by the outward display of religiosity by Hindus. The attacks are mainly a manifestation of religious supremacist doctrine which believes that idolatry, essentially the Hindu faith, is one that deserves to be annihilated since the very tenets of Hinduism, its practices and traditions are considered a sin in those doctrines. Since these attacks emanate from intrinsic and doctrinal animosity towards Hindus and Hinduism, it is considered a religiously motivated hate crime under this category. The third sub-category selected 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. The fourth 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 fifth sub-category selected here is: - Attacked for crossing 'Muslim area'. One of the reasons that Hindus get attacked unprovoked specifically by Islamists is for crossing ‘Muslim areas’. Essentially, Muslim mobs often attack Hindus crossing or present in certain areas which have a majority Muslim population. It has often been cited as one of the reasons to blame Hindus for attacks against themselves, signalling that Hindus displaying religious symbols, taking our religious processions or crossing any area which is dominated by Muslim residents is a provocation in and of itself. These areas are mostly ghettoized areas where mobs mobilize quickly to attack Hindus for a variety of reasons like playing music during a religious procession, crossing a mosque, wearing a tilak or any other religious symbol in a Muslim-dominated area, praying at a local temple in that area etc. There have been cases where the few local Hindus of that area have been attacked on their way to the Temple for prayers as well, simply because the area is considered a Muslim-dominated area. Several times, it is entirely possible that the immediate trigger for the violence against Hindus was non-religious in nature, however, the violence became religiously motivated in nature because the area was Muslim dominated and the residents on the whole harboured animosity towards Hindus, evidenced from the actions of the mob, the slogans, and the nature of the attack. Such crimes are motivated by the religious identity of the victims and are therefore classified as hate crimes under this category. The second primary category selected here is: Hate speech against Hindus. Within it, the sub-category 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 third primary category selected here is: - Attack on Hindu religious representation. Within it, the sub-category selected is: - Desecration of Hindu religious symbols. Icons and symbols or a religious representation of a spiritual ideal are widely revered in Hinduism. 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. Since these Hindu religious symbols hold paramount importance in Hinduism, any desecration of symbols, icons, murtis, religious representations and manifestations, is driven by animosity towards the faith itself which manifests itself through these murtis, icons and symbols. Therefore, any desecration of these Hindu religious symbols and representations is considered religiously motivated hate crimes under this category. The fourth primary category selected is - Restriction/Ban on Hindu Practices. The other sub-category selected is - Restriction on expression of Hindu identity. An example of the state-affected prejudicial and targeted orders against the Hindu community would be a government denying the right of a Hindu or a group of Hindus to hold a religious procession owing to the animosity of non-Hindu groups. Denial of the religious right of the Hindus to assuage the non-Hindu group which harbours animosity to a point where it could lead to violence against Hindus is not only a failure of law and order but is a prejudicial order against Hindus, denying them their fundamental rights to express their religious identity. An example of a hate crime against Hindus by a non-Hindu would be a non-Hindu institution forcing its Hindu employees to abandon religious symbols that a Hindu would wear as an expression of faith owing to inherent prejudice against the faith professed by the victim or a non-Hindu group of people restricting a Hindu group from constructing a place of worship simply because the demography of the area in which the temple is being built is dominated by non-Hindus. Such actions are driven by religious animosity and/or prejudice against Hindus and their faith and would therefore be categorized as a hate crime. This case qualifies as a hate crime because a group of Hindu devotees—Kanwariyas—were brutally assaulted with swords, sticks, and stones by a Muslim mob. The victims in this case were not random individuals but religious pilgrims engaged in the Kanwar Yatra. The attack occurred during the performance of this ritual, which directly links the motive of the perpetrators to the victims’ religious practice and identity. This was not an attack on people in a market or public space—it was an attack on those demonstrably engaged in Hindu devotion. As such, it qualifies as a hate crime because it targeted a religious group in the act of worship—a violation of both personal safety and freedom of religion. The Kanwar Yatra is a public expression of faith, featuring music, chanting, and devotional symbols, such as the saffron flag. Attacking a religious procession—especially when it is not entering private property or violating any law—is not a neutral act. It is an attack on the outward manifestation of Hindu religious belief. Such processions are often objected to by those who ideologically oppose the public display of Hindu symbols. This hostility—manifested violently—reflects an intention to silence, disrupt, or punish the religious expression of Hindus. The disruption of such a procession by non-Hindus is therefore more than just a physical altercation; it is an ideological act rooted in the desire to suppress the outward expression of Hindu religious identity. This pattern has been seen time and time again, where the Muslim community often resorts to disproportionate violence over minor scuffles, especially against Hindus. Even in this case, too, the brutal attack was triggered merely by the sound of the DJ playing devotional music, something which is common in Kanwar Yatras, where devotees had to walk for long distances. The Muslim mob responded with violent aggression, swords, sticks, and stones, turning a minor dispute into a full-blown one-sided communal attack against Hindu devotees. The violence was aimed at disrupting a Hindu religious procession and was rooted in animosity towards the public expression of Hindu devotion. The objection was raised to Hindu devotional music being played during the yatra. That objection quickly escalated into a violent mob attack. This shows that religious animosity was the foundational cause, not any neutral civil dispute. Even if clashes followed, the original violence was rooted in religious hostility toward Hindu practices. The victims were visibly identifiable as Hindu pilgrims—wearing saffron clothing, carrying symbolic flags, and playing devotional songs. The attack was not due to a personal quarrel but occurred because of who they were and what they were doing. The Hindu identity of the victims, made visible through their dress and activities, was treated as a provocation by the Muslim mob. This means the attack was driven by hatred towards a religious group, targeting them for their faith rather than any action. That qualifies this as a hate crime rooted in religious identity. The unprovoked attack was driven by intrinsic and doctrinal religious animosity, which also stemmed from the fact that the Kanaariyas were probably playing Hindu devotional songs while crossing the Mosque in a Muslim dominated area. In areas with a majority Muslim population, Hindus often face hostility since the tenets of Islam harbour antagonism towards the Hindu faith and the adherents of Hinduism. Such religious and doctrinal animosity manifests in violence against Hindu individuals when they outwardly display their faith in areas with a Muslim majority. Since the violence was a product of religious animosity, this case is being categorised as a religiously motivated hate crime. The perpetrators reacted violently to the presence of Hindus practising their faith in “their” area. This pattern of attacking Hindus merely for being visibly religious in Muslim-dominated zones shows a territorial religious supremacy, where Hindu presence itself is deemed unacceptable. This transforms the space into one where Hindu faith is not tolerated, and the act of crossing such a space becomes a trigger for communal violence. The Muslim mob also hurled caste-based abuse at the Kanwariyas. It can be argued that a caste-specific slur is aimed at the micro identity of belonging to the Dalit section of the Hindu community and not the Hindu identity itself. However, as far as Abrahamic religions are concerned, the micro identities of caste, region, and language are secondary. It is the religious identity that drives the animosity of the perpetrator against the Hindu victim. In this case, the Muslim mob hurled caste abuses at the Kanwariyas because of their animosity towards Hinduism and Hindus. The fact that caste slurs were hurled at the Kanwariyas further proves that the whole attack was religiously motivated rather than just a scuffle gone wrong. The saffron flag carried by the Kanwariyas was also torn. In this context, the saffron flag is not a mere piece of cloth but a powerful religious and cultural symbol representing Hindu dharma. Tearing the flag is not merely vandalism but a symbolic attack on the Hindu religion. It represents a rejection of the Hindu worldview and its sacred traditions, especially by ideologies that view Hinduism as idolatrous or sinful. Such desecration is often deeply symbolic and stems from a doctrinal animosity toward Hindu symbols. In this case, the act was not incidental—it was intentional, ideologically driven desecration, and therefore a clear case of hate crime against Hindu religious symbols. This case qualifies as a hate crime under the sub-category of “restriction or attack on the expression of Hindu identity” because the Kanwariyas were violently prevented from expressing their faith through standard and symbolic religious practices. The Kanwariyas were on a sacred pilgrimage, playing devotional music, wearing saffron attire, and carrying saffron flags — all essential expressions of Hindu religious identity. The Muslim mob’s attack was provoked solely by these expressions — especially the sound of devotional songs — and escalated into a brutal assault aimed at halting the procession. By using violence to silence bhajans, tear religious symbols, and stop the pilgrimage altogether, the perpetrators directly suppressed the Kanwariyas’ right to manifest their faith. This deliberate targeting of religious expression, driven by animosity towards Hindu practices, clearly constitutes a religiously motivated hate crime. Hence, it is a hate crime because the Kanwariyas were brutally attacked for expressing their Hindu faith—through music, symbols, and procession—by a Muslim mob driven by deep-seated religious animosity, evident in their objection to devotional songs, tearing of the saffron flag, caste-based slurs, and the deliberate attempt to suppress a Hindu religious practice in a Muslim-dominated area.
Case Status
Case sub-judice
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
From 10 to 100
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
