Anti-Hindu fake news: Obscene video of Sri Lankan Buddhist monk falsely circulated as Indian Hindu Priest on social media
India 
29 July, 2023
Case Summary
A false anti-Hindu narrative was circulated on social media involving a video that showed a Sri Lankan Buddhist monk in a compromising situation with two women. However, the video was deliberately misrepresented on social media with false assertions that the monk was a Hindu priest. Media reports later debunked this disinformation, confirming that the video depicted a Sri Lankan Buddhist monk named Pallegama Sumana Thero, who was found in a compromising position with a mother and daughter in Rassapana, Sri Lanka. The incident took place in July 2023 and resulted in the monk filing a police complaint against several men who assaulted him and vandalised his property. The false information was circulated on social media by a Muslim Twitter user, @shajath67, on 27 July 2023. He wrote, “The Hindu priest, sorry, prostitute, who divides India by religion…”. Another Muslim user named Mirza Baig posted, “This Islamophobic Hindu priest was caught with a mother and her daughter. Kya ghilazat hai ye tanatanis.” On 30 July 2023, the same video was reposted by another Twitter account named ‘Rofl Swara 2.0’ with the caption, “The saint is practising the creation of Hindu Rashtra.” The misleading video was shared across multiple Twitter accounts, all falsely attributing the conduct to a Hindu priest from India. The fabricated narrative was further amplified by individuals associated with the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) party and others, who distorted the monk’s identity and deliberately weaponised the incident to spread anti-Hindu sentiment.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the primary category- Hate speech against Hindus. The subcategory selected is- Anti-Hindu subversion and prejudice. The tertiary category selected is- Anti-Hindu Fake news or downplaying. 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. Media plays a specific and overarching reach in perpetuating prejudicial attitudes towards a community owing to unfair, untrue coverage and/or misrepresentation/misinterpretation, selective coverage and/or omission of facts of/pertaining to issues affecting a specific religious group. This type of bias can dehumanise the victim group, making it easier for others to justify harmful actions against them, which aligns with the objectives of hate speech laws aimed at preventing such harm. It is often observed that the media takes a prejudicial stand against the Hindu community driven by their need to shield the aggressor community which happens to be a numeric minority, however, is the one perpetrating violence against Hindus. For example, the media is often quick to contextualise religiously motivated crimes against Hindus, omit or misrepresent facts that point towards religiously motivated hate crimes, justify and/or downplay religiously motivated hate crimes or simply present fake news to stereotype Hindus. Such media bias leads to the denial of persecution and is often used to dehumanise Hindus, leading to justification for violence against them. For example, the media covered several fake allegations of Hindus targeting Muslims and forcing them to chant Jai Shree Ram. Most of these cases were proved false and fabricated after police investigation. These fake news reports were subsequently never retracted or clarified. Such fake news led to the justification of violence and dehumanisation of Hindus based on the argument that since Hindus targeted Muslims and forced them to chant Jai Shree Ram, the dehumanisation of Hindus and violence against them was par for the course and merely a retaliation. Such media bias leads to prejudicial portrayal of Hindus and offers a justification for violence against them and therefore, is considered hate speech under this category. The incident represented a clear case of anti-Hindu hate speech. The accused individuals deliberately circulated fake news by misrepresenting a Sri Lankan Buddhist monk involved in a compromising situation as a Hindu monk, with the intent to malign the image of Hindu religious figures. This deliberate falsehood reflected their deep-seated religious animosity towards the Hindu community. By falsely portraying revered Hindu monks in sex scandals, they sought to ridicule and vilify those who embody spiritual discipline and asceticism. Hindu monks, known for their commitment to celibacy, devotion, and moral conduct, were deliberately misrepresented to provoke religious hostility, fostering discrimination and hatred against them for their religious identity. The use of the doctored video to mock the concept of Hindu Rashtra further illustrated this entrenched prejudice. The idea of Hindu Rashtra, often misrepresented, simply denotes the cultural and civilisational identity of Bharat as rooted in Hindu heritage—it does not call for the exclusion of minorities. By mocking this idea in the context of a manipulated and defamatory post, the accused demonstrated their contempt for Hindu beliefs and their intent to fuel communal divisions. This narrative of hate was further amplified when members and supporters of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) party shared the same misleading content, falsely attributing the Sri Lankan monk to the Hindu faith. The DMK’s past record—ranging from statements by its leaders denigrating Hinduism to derogatory remarks comparing Hinduism to diseases like malaria and dengue—has shown a consistent pattern of intolerance towards Hindu traditions and deities. Such conduct deepened social hostility and normalised the abuse of Hindus and their sacred symbols within public discourse. Given all these facts, the incident met the parameters of a religiously motivated hate speech and was added to the hate crime database maintained by the Hinduphobia Tracker. It stood as another documented example of deliberate anti-Hindu disinformation designed to incite hatred, ridicule, and discrimination against the Hindu community. Disclaimer: In this case, given the fact that the fake news was spread by two Muslim-identified accounts and one additional handle whose identity is not established, the perpetrators are considered 'Muslim extremists' for documentation purposes. The perpetrator count is noted as '3', referring collectively to all three accused.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
From 2 To 5
Perpetrators Gender
unknown
Sources 
