Minor Hindu children prohibited from wearing tilak and kalava by their school headmaster, who denigrated Hinduism
Pilibhit, Uttar Pradesh, India 
10 December, 2025
Case Summary
In the Maharajpur village, Pilibhit district, Uttar Pradesh, minor Hindu children were prohibited from wearing a tilak (Sacred Hindu mark of vermilion on forehead), tying a kalava (sacred thread), or performing simple acts of worship by their school headmaster. The headmaster also insulted Hinduism and denigrated Hindu deities. The incident occurred at the Maharajpur composite school, where minor students were subjected to religious discrimination and coercion by the school headmaster. They were prohibited from donning a tilak, wearing a kalava, or performing daily ritual observances such as placing a stone under a Tulsi plant. The children stated that the headmaster insulted Hinduism and questioned the Hindu children why they worship stones, wear a tilak, or venerate the Tulsi plant, thereby dismissing and undermining Hindu beliefs in front of students. He also persuaded Hindu students to stop worshipping Hindu deities. The situation escalated after local Bajrang Dal activists, a group of Hindu activists, were informed by the children and visited the school to seek clarification about restrictions imposed on sacred Hindu symbols. During their visit, the activists also objected to students being made to sweep the school premises, including a girl child, which was inappropriate and exploitative. Following discussions with the school authorities, the activists applied a tilak and tied a kalava on the children within the school premises. After the video of the incident circulated on social media, the Block Education Officer contacted the headmaster, who claimed that a Kabir couplet critical of stone worship had been taught in class. He further claimed that the children were pressured by the Hindu activists to make such statements.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the first primary category: Restriction/ban on Hindu religious practice. Within this, 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 categorised 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 that 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 the 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 proselytisation, such cases are considered religiously motivated hate crimes. The third primary category selected here is - Hate speech against Hindus. Within it, the sub-category selected is- Anti-Hindu slurs, mocking faith. Anti-Hindu slurs and the deliberate mocking of the Hindu faith owing to religious animosity involve the usage of derogatory terms, stereotypes, or offensive references to religious practices, symbols, or figures. One of the common anti-Hindu slurs used against Hindus is “cow-worshipper” and “cow piss drinker”. The intention of using this term is to demean and mock Hindus as a group and their religious beliefs since Hindus consider the cow holy. Additionally, some symbols and the slurs attached to them have a historical context that exacerbates the insult, hate, stereotyping, dehumanisation and oppression against Hindus. Cow worship has been used for centuries to denigrate Hindus, insult their faith and oppress Hindus specifically as a religious group. There has been overwhelming documentation about how cow slaughter has been used to persecute Hindus with cow meat being thrown in temples and places of worship. There has also been overwhelming documentation where cow meat (beef) has been force-fed to Hindus to either forcefully convert them to Islam or denigrate their faith. Apart from cow worship, the Swastika – which holds deep religious significance for the Hindus – has also been misinterpreted and distorted to use as a slur against Hindus. Similarly, the worship of the Shivling has been used by supremacist ideologies and religions to denigrate Hindus owing to religious animosity. Such slurs and denigration stem out of inherent animosity and hate towards Hindus and their faith, therefore, it is categorised as hate speech targeted at Hindus specifically owing to their religious identity. This case has been added to the tracker because minor Hindu children were prohibited from wearing a tilak, tying a kalava (sacred thread), or performing simple acts of worship by their school headmaster. Firstly, such mandates stand as a clear example of religious intolerance and a hate crime against Hindu children and their faith. It goes beyond mere disciplinary action and constitutes targeted hostility towards Hindu students for their religious identity, raising serious concerns about the safety and protection of Hindus in educational institutions. The Tilak and Kalava are not merely decorative things; they hold profound spiritual and cultural significance for Hindus. They are emblems of Hindu religious identity, often worn during prayers, rituals, and as a daily affirmation of faith. Forcing Hindu students to remove these religious symbols is a deliberate effort to erase their religious identity and expression. Such an act is deeply disrespectful and constitutes a direct attack on the values and practices of Hinduism. This incident reflects a blatant restriction on the religious expression of Hindu children. The message it sends is that Hindu symbols are not welcome in the school and that these symbols would be forcibly removed if Hindu students display them. This not only violates a Hindu child’s fundamental right to practise and express his religion but also creates an atmosphere of fear and suppression, where Hindu children may feel compelled to conceal their faith. 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. Secondly, the headmaster also insulted Hinduism and denigrated Hindu deities, calling it stone worship. He also persuaded students not to worship Hindu deities and rhetorically asked what benefit they get from worshipping stones. Such remarks are designed to demean and undermine the faith of Hindus and intend to create an inferiority complex in the minds of the victims against their own faith. This fosters an environment of hostility and disrespect towards the Hindu community and Hindu deities. His comments specifically target Hinduism and its practices. Referring to Hindu idols as “stones” and mocking the act of worshipping them is a direct affront to the core of Hindu religious beliefs. For the Hindus, the idols of Hindu deities are not mere objects but are representations of the divine. Idols of Hindu deities are highly revered by Hindus. Dismissing these idols as mere “stones” is a deliberate attempt to belittle and insult the Hindu community and their religious beliefs and practices. Thirdly, it is important to note here that many of the victims were minors, which means the element of consent and genuine change of conscience was missing ab initio. Minors, due to their young age and lack of maturity, are particularly vulnerable to manipulation and coercion. They may not have the ability to fully understand the implications of converting to another religion or recognising such deception and brainwashing attempts, and the perpetrator purposely targeted and exploited this vulnerability of the victims. 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. The pseudo-seculars and leftist groups may argue that a similar line of reasoning should be applied in this case. However, it becomes important to mention here that most uniform codes focus on standardising clothing and accessories like shoes, belts, and hair. A Tilak and Kalava do not change the appearance of the uniform itself. These religious symbols are benign and do not cause disruption or harm, raising serious concerns about the motivations behind such enforcement. The actions of the school authorities amount to religious discrimination and are consistent with the framework of a hate crime, where Hindus are penalised solely for adhering to their Hindu religious practices. Since this case meets multiple parameters of a religiously motivated crime, it is being added to the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker. Disclaimer: The Hinduphobia Tracker records incidents based on when an event occurred or when the victim's ordeal began. It is important to clarify that none of the media sources covering this case has specified the exact date since when the accused was discriminating against Hindu children. Therefore, for documentation purposes, we have recorded the date based on when the incident was reported in the media, 11 December 2025.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Unknown
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
