A Hate Crime essentially has two important ingredients – an underlying offence which has been committed coupled with a bias. A hate crime is supposed to have taken place when the perpetrator intentionally targets an individual or a property owing to his/her bias against a certain characteristic of that individual or his/her hatred towards that characteristic.
While these characteristics could be many, for example, race, colour, regional identity, sexual orientation etc, for the purpose of this category under the Hindu Hate Tracker, we would consider only religious identity and the faith professed by the victim (specifically the Hindu faith) as a characteristic underlining the motivation of the crime against him/her.
Essentially, a hate crime requires a base offence to have been committed. In other words, the act committed should constitute an offence against the individual or group of people. The second component of a hate crime is the motivation of the crime – implicit or explicit. It is the presence of the bias motive that separates a hate crime from other crimes – even if the severity of the crime is more or less.
A religiously motivated attack against a Hindu would be considered a hate crime when the underlying motive of the crime (explicit or implicit) is driven by the Hindu identity (actual or perceived) of the victim. This would include the targeting of persons or property associated with Hindu people or communities.
There are several indications that can help identify a religiously motivated attack against Hindu/s. These are typically called bias indicators. Bias indicators could be several in such cases of hate attacks against Hindus. Bias indicators could be implicit or explicit. For example, the identification of Hindus based on the religious symbols they wear and/or the rituals and festivals they follow is an explicit bias. Other explicit biases could be anti-Hindu slurs being hurled at Hindus before or during the attack, the recipient of the violence being specifically and exclusively Hindus, chanting of slogans which allude to violence against “Kafirs” or “Non-Believers” in Islam, attack in a place or worship or while conducting religious ceremonies and/or rituals etc. There are several instances where the bias indicator could be implicit and not explicit. In many such cases, the trigger of the conflict is not explicit bias or religious motivations, however, once the violence and/or the incident escalates, the violence turns religious in nature and the bias indicators become explicit. For example, an incident of conflict emerged between the Hindus and Muslims in an area called Hauz Qazi in Delhi. The apparent trigger of the violence was a parking conflict, however, the conflict escalated into communal violence where the Muslim mob proceeded to attack Hindus specifically and desecrate their temple, including breaking and urinating on idols. The ensuing violence displayed explicit bias indicators and proved that Hindus were being targeted specifically for their religious identity. In both explicit and implicit bias indicators, the crime would be classified as a religiously motivated hate crime under this category.
This category of hate crime is divided into the following sub-categories:
- Attacked for crossing ‘Muslim area’
- Attack on religious procession
- Attacked for supporting ‘blasphemy’ accused
- Attack against Hindu devotees
- Attacked for Hindu identity
- Attacked for opposing radicals or trying to save victim
- Attacked to induce migration from non-Hindu dominated area
- Communal clash
- Attacked for refusal to convert
- Attacked for supporting/being part of perceived Hindu party/org or working for Hindu community
- Attacked over ‘Blasphemy’
Why it’s a hate crime
A religiously motivated attack against a Hindu would be considered a hate crime when the underlying motive of the crime (explicit or implicit) is driven by the Hindu identity (actual or perceived) of the victim. This would include the targeting of persons or property associated with Hindu people or communities.
Hate crimes and incidents are taken to mean any crime or incident where the perpetrator’s hostility or prejudice against an identifiable group of people is a factor in determining who is victimised. It is also important to note that these incidents documented as hate crimes would include any non-crime incident which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by a hostility or prejudice based on a person’s religion or perceived religion and any criminal offence which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by a hostility or prejudice based on a person’s religion or perceived religion.
Sub-categories and why it’s a hate crime
Attacked for “Blasphemy”
Blasphemy essentially refers to the desecration of anything which is held sacred/holy to a group of people. However, for religious supremacist groups, the elements of ‘blasphemy’ are ever-changing, shifting and expanding – leading to infringement on the rights of other religious groups, freedom of speech and expression, threats and even physical violence. There are instances where blasphemy is also used as a dog whistle to target Hindus owing to intrinsic animosity towards Hinduism. There are several instances where stating truths as mentioned in the non-Hindu doctrine itself has led to unmitigated violence against Hindus. There have also been instances where non-Hindus have themselves created a ‘blasphemous’ situation, like placing a Quran in a temple, to use it as an excuse to attack Hindus. Essentially, Blasphemy charges are often made up and/or are used to shut down any form of criticism of non-Hindu faiths and as a tool to target Hindus. Any physical violence over Blasphemy charges against Hindus are foundationally based on animosity for Hindus and their faith owing to religious supremacist ideologies, therefore, such attacks would be documented as religious motivated hate crimes under this category.
Attacked for supporting ‘blasphemy’ accused
Blasphemy essentially refers to the desecration of anything which is held sacred/holy to a group of people. However, for religious supremacist groups, the elements of ‘blasphemy’ are ever-changing, shifting and expanding – leading to infringement on the rights of other religious groups, freedom of speech and expression, threats and even physical violence. There are instances where blasphemy is also used as a dog whistle to target Hindus owing to intrinsic animosity towards Hinduism. There are several instances where stating truths as mentioned in the non-Hindu doctrine itself has led to unmitigated violence against Hindus. There have also been instances where non-Hindus have themselves created a ‘blasphemous’ situation, like placing a Quran in a temple, to use it as an excuse to attack Hindus. Essentially, Blasphemy charges are often made up and/or are used to shut down any form of criticism of non-Hindu faiths and as a tool to target Hindus. In such cases, after accusing a Hindu of ‘blasphemy’, often those supporting the Hindu being targeted are also physically attacked. Such attacks are purely motivated by religious animosity towards Hindus and are therefore categorized as religiously motivated hate crimes under this category.
Attacked for refusal to convert
When there is pressure, threat, or coercion employed upon the Hindu victim to convert to a different religion, in several cases, the victim refuses to succumb to the pressure/threats. Once the victim refuses, the perpetrator proceeds to attack/assault the victim owing to his/her refusal to convert. In such cases, the pressure/threat/intimidation/coercion/violence itself is driven by animosity towards the victim’s Hindu faith. The violence then is another hate crime driven by the victim’s refusal to abandon his professed faith, Hinduism, and convert to the religion of a non-Hindu perpetrator. Since the victim’s faith is at the heart of the pressure to convert and the ensuing violence towards the victim, such cases are considered religiously motivated hate crimes.
Attack on religious procession
The outwardly celebration and display of religious symbols is 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 outwardly 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.
Attacked for crossing ‘Muslim area’
One of the reasons that Hindus get attacked unprovoked specifically by Islamists is them 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 mobilise 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.
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 the 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.
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.
Attacked for opposing radicals/or trying to save victim from radicals
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.
Attacked to induce migration from non-Hindu dominated area
There have been cases where the Hindus living in an area, often with a majority dwelling belonging to non-Hindus or those harbouring animosity towards the Hindu faith, the Hindu residents experience threats and violence. The violence is employed with the aim of making the Hindus leave the area and relocate, so the area could be turned into an exclusive ghetto for adherents of the non-Hindu faith or those who harbor animosity towards the Hindu faith. In several cases, the aim of exodus is explicit. However, in several cases, the demand for the exodus of Hindu residents is not explicit, however, violence by non-Hindu residents leaves the Hindu residents no option but to leave the area, thereby, turning the area into an exclusive ghetto of non-Hindu residents. In such cases, there are instances of violence against the Hindu residents explicitly. For example, in the Hauz Qazi case of 2019, the Muslim residents claimed that mob violence against the Hindu residents had been triggered by a parking dispute. However, the violence did turn religious with a temple being desecrated and directed specifically against the Hindu residents. The Hindu residents of the area were clear that the violence was religiously motivated and one of the motives was to affect an exodus of the Hindu residents. In such cases, even though the perpetrators have not explicitly expressed the aim of affecting the exodus, the given circumstances and violence and precedent point to the intention of exodus and therefore would be categorized under this sub-category. Such crimes are religiously motivated and therefore are hate crimes.
Attacked for supporting/being part of perceived Hindu party/org or working for Hindu community
In several cases, Hindus are attacked specifically or tangentially for their association with parties or organisations perceived to be pro-Hindu and/or for working in favour of the Hindu community. One of the classic cases was the attack against a Bharatiya Janata Party Yuva Morcha (BJYM) worker Praveen Nettaru. Nettaru was attacked and hacked to death for his association with Hindu organizations and his work for the Hindu community. He was murdered by PFI, a terror organization which aimed to commit a genocide of Hindus, target Hindu leaders specifically and turn India into an Islamic Nation. In such cases, it is possible that the immediate trigger for the violence is non-religious – either according to the perpetrator or the police. However, there are surrounding circumstances from which the conclusion can be reached that the victim was attacked for his association with a Hindu organization. In a similar case, Rinku Sharma was attacked by radicals. He was a member of Bajrang Dal and regularly worked for the Hindu community. While the police cited a different non-religious trigger for the attack, it is true that he was associated to a Hindu organization and the family of Rinku Sharma specifically attributed his gruesome murder to him working for Bajrang Dal and raising Jai Shree Ram slogans. Such cases are intrinsically driven by religious hate and would therefore be documented as a hate crime under this category.
Communal clash
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.
Parameters applied
- There must be a physical attack on individuals and/or their property for it to qualify as a hate crime under this category.
- The attack must not result in death for the purpose of this category.
- The attack must have bias indicators against the victims of violence based on their religious identity.
- The attack must be motivated by the perpetrator’s religious beliefs of supremacy or prejudice and/or animosity towards the religious identity (real or perceived) of the Hindu victim/s.
- The victim/s must be Hindu/s or identified as Hindus by the perpetrators.
- Any expression of religious supremacy as the driving factor and motivation of the crime is automatically considered a bias indicator to make the crime a religiously motivated hate crime. Religious supremacy by definition negates not just the legitimacy of the victim’s faith but also harbours animosity towards other faiths and therefore, any expression of such supremacist sentiments will be considered a bias indicator for the hate crime.
- Even if the trigger of the violence is non-religious in nature, the incident of attack would be added to the hate crime database under this category if the violence escalates into a religiously motivated attack and has religious bias indicators.
- Any attack which lacks any religious bias indicator, explicit or implicit, will not be added to this database even if the perpetrator is a non-Hindu and the victim is a Hindu.
- As far as anti-Hindu riots and communal clashes are concerned, that members from non-Hindu communities would also be casualties in the riots won’t preclude the riot from being anti-Hindu. In any riot or communal clash, members of both communities lose their lives. However, the parameter applied to decide whether it was a religiously motivated hate crime against Hindus, would be to evaluate which side started the violence and either the conspiracy to create violence against Hindus which precedes the violence, the intent of the start of the violence and indicators as to which side was acting in self-defence and which side was the original aggressor of the violence.
- As far as communal clashes are concerned, that the trigger of the violence was non-communal in nature will not preclude the incident from being added to the hate crime database. The evaluation would be made based on who started the violence and whether bias indicators were present during the violence and/or after the incident escalated.
- Statements of victims and eyewitnesses would be given precedent in determining whether a case had bias indicators. For example, if the victim says that they were targeted based on their religious identity, to affect exodus from the area or that religious slurs were used during the violence, the case would be documented as a religiously motivated hate crime.
- The police statement claiming that aggression by the non-Hindu community was not “communal in nature” is not the ultimate evidence of the violence not being a religiously motivated hate crime. All circumstances of the case would be considered before evaluating whether a case is a religiously motivated hate crime. Very often, even when there is an obvious religious motivation for the crime, the police claim that there is no communal angle. This happens for several reasons. First and foremost, any such religious violence is often seen as the failure of the police force and law enforcement agencies, hence, the first instinct of the police is to deny the “communal angle”. The other is that the ire of the aggressor community can just as easily fall on the police and any acknowledgement of their religious motivations, and police fears, can lead to more aggression from the offending community. Lastly, there are some cases where the police attempt to assuage the non-Hindu aggressor community by trying to downplay their religious motivations. Due to all of these reasons, the police statement about ‘no communal angle’ is not the ultimate proof that a religiously motivated crime has not occurred against the Hindu victim. All circumstances surrounding the crime will be evaluated.
- The intent of the violence and bias indicators against the Hindu victim/s is of paramount importance in such cases. In some cases, some of the perpetrators may outwardly profess the Hindu religious identity, however, if the indicators of bias are anti-Hindu and the motivation of the crime was to specifically offend Hindus and attack Hindus owing to religious animosity and hate, the case would be documented as a religiously motivated hate crime.
Laws in India about attacks against a specific community
There are several laws and sections of the IPC which are invoked by law enforcement agencies in such cases. Most common are IPC sections 109 (abetment of an offence), 153 (provocation with intent to cause riot), 153A(2) [Promoting enmity between two groups (offence committed in place of worship)], 295 (defiling a place of worship), 295A (outrage religious feelings), 296 (disturbing religious assembly), 120B (criminal conspiracy) and 34 (common intention). Further, depending on the case, several other sections can be invoked. For example, 146 of IPC which is for rioting. In such cases, where the violence leads to death, other sections like IPC for murder are also invoked. There is, however, no specific law to prosecute people for religiously motivated hate crimes against Hindus.
