In a controversial verdict, the Karnataka High court acquitted three Muslim men accused of hate speech, predatory proselytization, and desecration of a Hindu temple in Jamkhandi. The accused, Mustafa Murtusaheb Momin, Alisaheb Shabir Alagundi, and Suleman Riyaz Ahemed Galagali, had allegedly entered the Ramatheerth Temple on 4 May 2025, distributed Islamic pamphlets, insulted Hindu deities, and offered inducements for conversion.
Incident Details
Eyewitnesses reported that the men entered the temple premises around 4:30 PM, engaging devotees in religious debates. According to the FIR, they allegedly declared, “If you remain a Hindu, you will never find God. There is no God except Allah, and all other gods are Kafir.” They also reportedly threatened devotees, saying, “We will not spare your lives,” while offering jobs in Dubai and vehicles as incentives for conversion.
The police had registered the case under Section 299 (Offence against religion), Section 351(2) (Insult to religion), Section 3(5) (Conversion by inducement) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, abd Section 5 of Karnataka Protection of Right to Freedom of Religion Act, 2022 (banning forced/fraudulent conversions)
Court’s Acquittal: A Mockery of Justice?
Despite witness testimonies and FIR records, the court dismissed the charges, citing “lack of conclusive evidence.” Hindu groups have condemned the verdict, calling it a “judicial betrayal” that emboldens religious aggression against Hindus.
Legal experts point out that the court ignored the following:
Temple Desecration – Distributing non-Hindu religious material inside a sacred Hindu space.
Hate Speech – Openly denigrating Hindu deities as “false” and threatening devotees.
Predatory Proselytization – Offering bribes for conversion, a punishable offence under state law.
Legal analysts say the acquittal may stem from procedural lapses in the police investigation, including delayed witness verification and alleged mishandling of digital evidence. However, critics say the court could have taken into account the pattern of behavior and the religious context of the incident, particularly the temple setting and the use of terms like “kafir” and “no God except Allah”, which carry theological weight that can constitute hate speech under existing law.
The incident had also raised concerns about violations of temple sanctity rules, which prohibit non-devotional or proselytising activity within the premises. According to temple authorities, no permission was sought by the accused, nor was there any interfaith event scheduled on the day in question.
This ruling sets a dangerous precedent, suggesting that Hindu places of worship and sentiments are not legally protected. Critics argue that had the roles been reversed – Hindus entering a mosque to preach and insult Islam – the judicial response would have been, well, no prizes for guessing.
(With inputs from Hinduphobia Tracker)
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
