Hindu students forced to remove Tilak and Kalava by school teacher

Case ID : b45f3b1 | Location : Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, India | Date of Incident : Tue, 10 December, 2024
Case ID : b45f3b1
location Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, India
date 10 December, 2024
Hindu students forced to remove Tilak and Kalava by school teacher
Restriction/ban on Hindu practices
Restriction on expression of Hindu identity
Administration restricting religious practice
Attack not resulting in death
Attacked for Hindu identity
Predatory Proselytisation
Proselytisation by grooming, brainwashing, manipulation or subtle indoctrination

Case Summary

Controversy erupted in the Doon International School, situated in Rishikesh's Raiwala district when a school teacher forced two Hindu students to wash off the tilak and cut the Kalava (sacred thread) they wore around their wrists. The parents along with members of a Hindu organisation gathered outside the school premises to protest against the same. They raised slogans against the school administration, accusing it of disrespecting Hindu customs and sentiments. After the ruckus, the accused teacher acknowledged the mistake and assured that it wouldn't happen again. The school management intervened, promising that no such incidents would occur in the future.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

The case has been added as a religiously motivated hate crime under three main categories of the tracker. The first is- Attack not resulting in death, within which, the sub-category 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 category under which this case has been placed, based on case details, is- Restriction/ban on Hindu practices. Within this, two sub-categories have been selected. The first 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 sub-category under the above-mentioned main category selected here is- Administration restricting religious practice. In several cases, it is seen that the administration/state disallows a religious practice owing to prejudicial orders and concerns, targeted specifically against the Hindu community. Such restriction/prohibition would be considered documented as a hate crime because the orders are often a result of pressure by groups that harbour animosity towards Hinduism and Hindus. Often, the restriction by the authorities is driven by bias, hostility, or prejudice against the specific community being stopped from holding a religious practice, by pressure groups that harbour animosity towards Hindus, intrinsic to their faith. Since practices are intrinsic to the faith of the Hindus, such prejudicial restriction is considered a curtailing of the fundamental rights of the Hindu community. In several cases, for example, the authorities ban a Hindu religious practice due to pressure from groups opposed to the religion. In other instances the prohibition is selectively enforced against one religious group (Hindus) while others are allowed to proceed. There are still other cases where the authorities preemptively restrict a religious practice by Hindus because those who hold animosity towards Hindus may get “provoked” leading to them being violent, thereby assuaging the sentiments of those who hold animosity towards Hindus by curtailing the religious rights of Hindus. Such acts and orders are prejudiced, indicating discriminatory motives owing to the capitulation to groups that harbour animosity towards Hindus and therefore, would be categorized as a religiously motivated hate crime since the original pressure leading to the order itself is a result of hatred/bias/prejudice/religious hate against Hindus. The third main category relevant here is- Predatory Proselytisation and within this, the sub-category 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, the school teacher displayed deep disdain for the Hindu faith by forcefully removing the tilak and sacred threads (Kalavas) from Hindu students' foreheads and wrists respectively. In Hinduism, the Tilak and Kalava hold deep religious, cultural, and spiritual significance. It symbolizes protection, blessings, unity, and commitment to spiritual and ethical principles. Its use across various rituals and ceremonies underscores its importance in the Hindu way of life and by forcefully removing the tilak and cutting off the Kalava, the teachers insulted the Hindu faith and displayed their deep disdain towards the religion. Though the principal of the school and the teacher did acknowledge their mistake after facing protests from the victim's family members and Hindu organisations, the assault was motivated by prejudice against the victim's Hindu identity, indicating a deep-seated intolerance and animosity the school harboured against the Hindu faith. Since the central motivation, in this case, is religion, this case has been added as a hate crime. Further, it is important to note here that the victims in this case were minors, indicating a lack of consent and a genuine change of conscience. It is a well-established fact that children are more susceptible to manipulation since they are still developing emotionally, cognitively, and socially. Their brains are not fully matured, making them more vulnerable to influence and less capable of critically evaluating information. Moreover, subtle manipulation tactics can be difficult to detect, especially when employed by trusted authority figures in positions of influence. This makes it challenging for parents, to identify and address instances of religious manipulation. Consequently, cases involving religious manipulation of minors not only represent an infringement on an individual's religious freedom but also demonstrate a calculated strategy of targeting those who are less able to resist or understand the long-term implications of conversion, making it a significant case of religious motivated hate crime. For this reason, too, this case qualifies to be documented here, in the database.

Victim Details

Total Victim

2

Deceased

0


Gender

  • Male 0
  • Female 0
  • Third Gender 0
  • Unknown 2

Caste

  • SC/ST 0
  • OBC 0
  • General 0
  • Unknown 2

Age Group

  • Minor 2
  • Adult 0
  • Senior Citizen 0
  • Unknown 0
Case Status Background
Gavel Icon

Case Status


Unknown

Case Status Background
Gavel Icon

Perpetrators Details

Perpetrators


Unknown

Perpetrators Range


One Person

Perpetrators Gender


unknown

Case Details SVG
The details of each case are updated till the day it has been added to the database. It is not practical for us to manually track the progress of every case listed in the Hinduphobia Tracker database. If you have additional information which you believe should reflect here, please provide additional details by clicking the button below. If you believe this case should not be considered a religiously motivated hate crime, you can proceed to raise a dispute using the same button.
Please note the case ID: b45f3b1 <click to copy case id>, you must enter the same in the form which will pop up after clicking the button.