Hindus issued threats of violence and demolition over construction of a temple by members of the Muslim community
Shahjahanpur, Uttar Pradesh, India 
27 June, 2025
Case Summary
In Shahjahanpur, Uttar Pradesh, Hindus faced violent threats from members of the Muslim community. The accused also threatened to demolish a Hindu temple. The conflict arose over construction work taking place at the temple, which is adjacent to a Muslim burial ground. According to media reports, a dispute emerged following the commencement of construction work at the temple located in the Johana village of the tehsil area. The land of the temple and the graveyard lie side by side. According to Hindu villagers, when the construction work began at the temple, the Muslims threatened them with violence. They also issued threats of demolishing the Hindu temple. Following this, the Hindu villagers, led by Neeraj Verma, District General Secretary of the Hindu Yuva Vahini, along with dozens of residents, submitted a complaint to the SDM office, voicing their concerns. The villagers stated that this was not the first conflict of its kind; a similar dispute had occurred in 2011 when temple construction was halted by the Muslims. At that time, the police and the tehsildar mediated to divide the land between the temple and the graveyard. After receiving the memorandum, SDM Ravindra Kumar assured that justice would be served. He ordered the construction work to be suspended until a proper land measurement could be conducted, a condition to which all parties agreed.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category- Hate Speech against Hindus. Within this, the subcategory selected 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. This case is a clear example of a hate crime targeting the Hindu community. The land where the temple construction was taking place had already been allocated to the Hindus by the tehsildar and police in 2011. Since then, the land allotted to Hindus rightly belonged to them. The Hindus were carrying out construction on their own temple land without encroaching on Muslim-designated land. Despite this, Muslims began threatening and obstructing the Hindus during construction. Such actions are a blatant violation of the fundamental rights of Hindus to practise their faith and to carry out any legitimate constructions they wish within their places of worship. This act of issuing threats by the Muslim perpetrators reveals deep-rooted religious hostility towards the Hindu community and their sacred spaces. It is important to note that there was no provocation from the Hindu side, nor any attempt to encroach on the Muslim share of the land. Hindus respected the boundaries and did not interfere with activities on the land allotted to Muslims. The threats issued by the Muslims were therefore completely unjustified and indicative of a broader pattern rooted in an Islamic supremacist mindset, where dominance is asserted over land in or around any territory claimed as “their own.” This dominance is often enforced through threats, coercion, and, at times, extreme violence. There is a clear precedent for such behaviour, with numerous documented cases in which Muslims have encroached upon Hindu-owned land and then resorted to intimidation or violence when challenged. These are not mere land disputes but acts driven by doctrinal hostility towards non-Muslims, aimed at asserting Islamic supremacy and intimidating the Hindu community into submission. The Hinduphobia Tracker has documented several incidents of Muslims illegally encroaching on Hindu temple land and responding with violence and intimidation when opposed. For example, in Maheshtala, West Bengal, a violent communal clash erupted after local Hindus resisted illegal encroachment by a Muslim vendor on Shiva temple land. When Hindus installed a Tulsi Manch on the reclaimed site, false claims were made that they forced a Muslim to chant “Jai Shri Ram,” sparking a large-scale mob attack. Over 2,000 Muslims, mobilised with prior planning, selectively targeted Hindus, vandalising the temple, looting Hindu shops, injuring devotees, and attacking police. Muslim shops were left untouched, while sacred Hindu spaces and symbols were desecrated. Multiple residents confirmed the violence was one-sided and strategically aimed at intimidating the Hindu community. In one instance, in the Mallawan area of Hardoi district, Uttar Pradesh, Muslims encroached on the “Laalta Baba Dev Sthan” temple land, erecting a graveyard signboard and fencing it illegally. Similarly, in another instance, in Kundru Kalan village, Jharkhand, land belonging to a Hindu temple named Shivalaya Mandir was encroached upon by members of the Muslim community for illegal construction. This led to concerns among Hindus regarding the celebration of a tribal Hindu festival, which had been celebrated on the temple land for the past 200 years. Moreover, the religious motivation behind this crime became even clearer when the Muslim perpetrators threatened to demolish the Hindu temple itself. For Hindus, a temple is far more than a building; it is the sacred abode of a deity, a living spiritual centre embodying faith, devotion, and cultural identity. Temples are vital places of worship, community gathering, and the preservation of religious traditions. Threatening to destroy such a sacred site is not merely an attack on property but a direct assault on the religious sentiments and identity of the entire Hindu community. Such acts are fueled by religious animosity against Hinduism and aim to inflict emotional and spiritual harm, undermining the community’s sense of security and belonging. Therefore, this is undoubtedly a crime motivated by religious hatred towards the Hindu community. Furthermore, the Muslim perpetrators issued threats of violence against Hindus. This goes well beyond ordinary community disputes, illustrating a deliberate and systematic attempt to intimidate and suppress the Hindu community through fear. These actions are rooted in religious hostility towards the Hindu community, their faith and their places of worship, making it an instance of a religiously motivated crime. Since this case meets the parameters of a religiously motivated crime, it is being added to the hate crime database.
Case Status
Complaint filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
Unknown
Perpetrators Gender
unknown
Sources 
