Minor Hindu students beaten by teacher at missionary school for dressing as Ram-Sita during Ram Navami celebrations in Wardha, Maharashtra
Wardha, Maharashtra, India 
27 March, 2026
Case Summary
In Alipur of Wardha district, Maharashtra, minor Hindu students at a Christian missionary school named Alphonsa School were beaten by their teacher, Bhave, for dressing up as Lord Ram and Goddess Sita during Ram Navami celebrations. According to media reports, on the day of Ram Navami celebrations in the school, a few Hindu students dressed up as Ram and Sita. Due to this, Bhave severely beat the Hindu students who dressed as Lord Ram and Goddess Sita. Following this, the former MP Suresh Waghmare informed the victims' parents about the incident. Subsequently, the parents, along with a former MLA, a panchayat member, and Bajrang Dal workers, rushed to the school. They confronted the teacher who assaulted the students in front of the principal and demanded action. The teacher gave no answer. As a result, the parents registered complaints against the school. Former MP Waghmare called the police and education officials and demanded accountability. The school's principal, Sister Atulya, registered a case against the teacher and dismissed him from his post. After this incident, questions arose regarding safety, values, and rules within the school, along with violence against Hindu students.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The first primary category selected in this case is- Attack not resulting in death. The subcategory selected is- 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. The second primary category selected is- Restriction/ban on Hindu practices. The subcategory selected 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 third primary category selected is- Predatory Proselytisation. The subcategory selected is- Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination. 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. In this case, minor Hindu students dressed up as Lord Ram and Goddess Sita during Ram Navami celebrations in a missionary school faced brutal beatings from their teacher. Attacking Hindu children simply for honouring their revered deities during one of their most sacred festivals exposes raw religious hatred towards the Hindu community, turning a moment of innocent joy into trauma. This deliberate violence against young Hindu devotees expressing their faith marks it as a clear instance of religiously motivated hate crime, where the perpetrator lashed out not at misbehaviour but at the very symbols of Hindu devotion that fill Hindus' hearts with pride. The manner in which the school teacher beat these minor Hindu students reveals his deep-seated religious animosity towards the Hindu community. Dressing as Lord Ram and Goddess Sita on Ram Navami carries profound meaning, embodying the epic love, righteousness, and devotion from the Ramayana that inspire families to celebrate with plays, processions, and prayers, fostering a Hindu child's first spark of cultural pride. By targeting them for this open expression of faith in a school setting, the teacher assaulted their religious identity head-on, hating the living symbols of Hinduism they embodied. Such attacks on Hindu victims for practising their beliefs in public showcase the perpetrator's anti-Hindu bigotry, cementing this as a religiously motivated hate crime. If the teacher truly objected to their costumes of Lord Ram and Goddess Sita, he had countless civil options, especially since the students dressed up solely for the annual Ram Navami celebration in a secular institution where every child holds the fundamental right to express their religion without fear. No law was broken, and this one-day event harmed no one, yet instead of consulting higher authorities or discussing calmly, he chose vicious physical assault on Hindu children portraying Ram and Sita. This overreaction bypasses all pretence of discipline, proving the violence stemmed not from rules but from hatred for Hindu students boldly carrying their religious identity in public, making it a stark, religiously motivated hate crime. The teacher's choice to brutalise these vulnerable Hindu students instilled immediate fear, coercing them to hide their faith and dread future reprisals in school, a place meant for growth, not terror. This predatory targeting of young Hindus for their identity amplifies the crime's malice, as frightened children internalise shame about their religious roots, priming them for manipulation and marking it as a profoundly religiously motivated hate crime. The assault over Ram-Sita costumes further proves the perpetrator sought to stifle the students' fundamental right to express their Hindu identity during Ram Navami, a cornerstone of their faith celebrated with unbridled joy. Beating Hindu children for this public display did not just punish individuals but aimed to crush collective Hindu expression, signalling that Hindu faith has no place in shared spaces. By attacking their vibrant portrayal of sacred figures, he targeted the community's spirit itself, suppressing devotion and pride to enforce silence, which establishes this as a clear, religiously motivated hate crime. Here, it is important to mention that in 2022, a massive controversy erupted in Karnataka, which took a national form, after Muslim women insisted that they should be allowed to wear burqas and hijabs in their schools and classrooms. At that time, the argument that was given by several politicians, social commentators, Hindu activists and even the judiciary was that schools have the right to enforce uniform rules, since wearing uniforms brings harmony and equality in the classroom, and therefore, schools not allowing girls to wear hijab in the classroom is not religious discrimination, but merely an enforcement of widely accepted uniform norms. Pseudo-seculars and anti-Hindu leftist groups may argue that similar reasoning to the Karnataka hijab row should apply here. However, this case cannot be compared in any way to that controversy. Here, Hindu students did not ditch the uniform permanently, nor did they demand to wear Ram-Sita costumes every day. A few students wore them only for Ram Navami celebrations. Unlike this, in Karnataka, Muslim women demanded permission to wear hijabs, burqas, and niqabs to school every day. Therefore, this raises serious concerns about the motivations behind such anti-Hindu enforcement. The teacher's actions amount to religious discrimination and fit the framework of a hate crime, where Hindus are penalised solely for adhering to their religious practices. Such restrictions on Hindu students erode their bond with their roots over time, breeding fear of expressing their religious identity in schools and pushing them to conceal it as the only shield against prejudice or violence. Constant ridicule and attacks attach negative shame to their faith, fostering disassociation that leaves young Hindus ripe for predatory conversion to other religions later in life. With minors involved, lacking true consent or understanding, they remain particularly vulnerable to manipulation and coercion due to their young age and emotional immaturity. They may not fully grasp the lifelong implications of converting to another religion, and the perpetrator purposely targeted and exploited this vulnerability to groom them indirectly for proselytisation. Since this case exemplifies the use of coercion and manipulation to erode their Hindu faith, it stands as a blatant act of religious hate, confirming it as a clear religiously motivated hate crime documented in the hate tracker. Given that this case meets every parameter of a religiously motivated hate crime, it is being added to the Hate Crime Database of the Hinduphobia Tracker. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records incident dates based on when the crime occurred, not when the media reported it. In this current case, since the media reports did not state the exact date of this crime. Hence, the date when the media first reported the incident, 28 March 2026, serves as the indicative incident date for documentation purposes only.
Case Status
Case adjudicated
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Others
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
