Hindu students punished and humiliated for Tilak, Kalava by Muslim administration at school
Sehore, Madhya Pradesh, India 
28 December, 2025
Case Summary
Hindu students endured severe disciplinary actions from the Muslim administration at St. Angela's School in Jatkheda village of Sehore district, Madhya Pradesh. Children were compelled to remove Kalava (sacred threads) and Tilak (forehead marks) while being made to stand outside in freezing temperatures. Some students were forced into physically punishing positions, including the murga posture. The incident came to light after parents and villagers raised concerns following the circulation of photographs and videos on social media. Students confirmed that school authorities explicitly prohibited them from wearing a kalava and a tilak, important symbols of their faith. The restrictions caused emotional and psychological distress, leaving the children humiliated and upset. The principal of St. Angelas School, Samreen Khan, and a teacher, Shibu Khan, were identified as responsible for enforcing these punishments. The district education officer, Sanjay Singh Tomar, visited the school following complaints and confirmed that the students had been subjected to mistreatment. The school was fined one lakh rupees. The principal and the driver were removed from their positions. Officials confirmed that further legal action would be pursued against the staff for violating the rights and safety of the students. The incident sparked widespread concern among parents, residents, and community organisations. It highlighted the urgent need for oversight and accountability in educational institutions to ensure the safety, dignity, and rights of students are upheld.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been documented under the selected primary category: Restriction/ban on Hindu practices. Under this, the selected secondary category 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. The second primary category selected here is: Predatory Proselytisation. Under this, the sub-category selected is: Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination, with the tertiary category being: Conversion of minor. Religious brainwashing essentially means the often subtle and forcible indoctrination to induce someone to give up their religious beliefs to accept contrasting regimented ideas. Religious grooming or brainwashing also involves propaganda and manipulation. It involves the systematic effort, driven by religious malice and indoctrination, to persuade “non-believers’ to accept allegiance, command, or doctrine to and of a contrasting faith. Cases of such grooming or brainwashing are far more nuanced than direct threats, coercion, inducement and violence. In such cases, it is often seen that there is repeated, subtle and continual manipulation of the victim to induce disaffection towards their own faith and acceptance of the contrasting faith of the perpetrator. While subtle indoctrination is widely acknowledged as predatory, an element which is often understated in such conversions or the attempts of such conversion is the role of loyalty and trust which might develop between the perpetrator and the victim. Fiduciary relationships are often abused to affect such religious conversion. For example, an educator transmitting religious doctrine of a competing faith to a Hindu student. The Hindu student is likely to accept what the teacher is transmitting owing to existence of the fiduciary relationship. The exploitation of the fiduciary relationship to religiously indoctrinate victims would also be included in this category. Since the underlying animosity towards the victim’s faith forms the basis of predatory proselytization, such cases are considered religiously motivated hate crimes. This case can be considered a religiously motivated hate crime due to the following factors: Firstly, the nature of the punishment imposed on the students reflected a clear breach of child protection standards. Children were forced to stand outside in cold weather, partially unclothed, and subjected to physically painful positions such as murga. National education guidelines and child welfare laws prohibit corporal punishment and degrading treatment, recognising their potential to cause both physical harm and long-term psychological trauma. The severity of the punishment was grossly disproportionate to any academic or disciplinary issue. Secondly, the forced removal of kalava and tilak directly interfered with the students’ freedom to practise their religion. These symbols form an integral part of Hindu religious identity and daily practice. Preventing children from wearing them and linking punishment to their presence placed religion at the centre of the disciplinary action rather than behaviour or conduct. Thirdly, the element of coercion significantly aggravated the seriousness of the incident. The students were minors under the authority of teachers and school administrators, leaving them with no capacity to refuse or protect themselves. The use of fear, humiliation, and physical discomfort to enforce compliance created an environment of intimidation rather than education. Such actions are common tactics in environments where subtle or overt pressure is used to alienate Hindu children from their religious identity. It serves as the first step in a larger pattern of grooming, where consistent ridicule, punishment, and forced removal of Hindu symbols and practices make a child more susceptible to abandoning their faith and embracing another under pressure. These are deliberate actions to facilitate the gradual suppression of Hindu practices to erode the child’s confidence in their own religion over time, normalising the idea that Hindu identity must be hidden or discarded to fit in. These are meant to alienate Hindu children from their own faith. Such actions are rooted in bias and disdain for Hinduism, its adherents, and its practices, making it a religiously motivated crime. The fact that the victims are minors, who are not yet cognitively developed to critically resist such pressure, makes this even more serious, since their impressionable minds are far easier to manipulate and reshape against their own faith. Fourthly, the vulnerability of the victims amplified the impact of the abuse. Children depend on schools for safety, care, and emotional security. Using institutional authority to inflict punishment tied to religious identity exploited this dependency and constituted an abuse of power. Fifthly, the psychological consequences for the students were severe. Public humiliation, exposure to cold, and forced suppression of religious expression caused fear, shame, and emotional distress. Such treatment has been shown to damage self-esteem, trust in authority, and a child’s sense of belonging. Sixthly, the role of the institution itself warranted scrutiny. Schools are expected to uphold constitutional principles, including equality and freedom of religion. The punishments were carried out within school premises and under official authority, indicating institutional failure rather than an isolated act by an individual. Seventhly, the intervention by the district education officer confirmed that mistreatment had occurred, leading to administrative penalties, including a monetary fine and removal of staff. This official action established that the conduct violated legal and ethical standards governing educational institutions. Eighthly, the broader social response highlighted the seriousness of the incident. Parents and local residents expressed strong concern after visual evidence circulated, reflecting widespread recognition that the incident was not ordinary discipline but a violation of dignity and faith. Finally, when assessed collectively, the targeting of religious symbols, the use of physical and psychological punishment, the abuse of authority, and institutional accountability failures demonstrated a pattern of religiously motivated hostility. Religion was not incidental to the harm but central to its execution and impact. It is thus added to the tracker.
Case Status
Complaint filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
From 2 To 5
Perpetrators Gender
both
Sources 
