Hindu students prohibited from wearing Tilak and Kalava, forced to read Bible at missionary school in Seoni, Madhya Pradesh
Seoni, Madhya Pradesh, India 
7 December, 2025
Case Summary
A mission school in Seoni, Madhya Pradesh, prohibited certain Hindu rituals, such as applying a tilak and tying a Kalava (sacred thread), while involving students in Bible reading and prayer sessions. This raised concerns among the local Hindu community. These actions led to tensions in the area, with many people gathering outside the school to protest. When members of the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal were informed, they arrived at the scene and joined the protests. Witnesses reported that a teacher had been reading from the Bible and leading the students in prayer, which intensified the situation and triggered the demonstration. Police quickly arrived, spoke to the students, and confiscated the Bible found in the classroom. In the wake of the protest, the police deployed a significant force around the school to maintain order. Protesters stated that the school was promoting religious conversion by influencing the children, which they strongly opposed. Both VHP and Bajrang Dal have called for immediate and stringent action from the authorities, considering the matter highly serious. It was also pointed out during the protests that the school had no portraits of Indian national heroes or freedom fighters. Instead, pictures of British colonial rulers were found on the walls, which protesters found offensive and questioned the school’s management intentions. This incident created widespread anger and fear among the parents, who are concerned about the school’s influence on their children. The police assured that an impartial and detailed investigation would be conducted, and necessary action would be taken based on the findings.
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. This case has been added to the tracker because a Christian missionary school prohibited Hindu children from wearing a Tilak or wearing Kalava, auspicious Hindu religious symbols. 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 to avoid similar treatment. 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. Hindu activists also stated that students were being forced into Bible studies and prayer meetings by the school. By deliberately exposing the minor students to Christian teachings, the administration demonstrated actions driven by clear religious animosity towards the students' religious identity. This was not an act of casual interaction; it reflected a conscious attempt to distance the students from their own religion and convert them, through subtle manipulation and indoctrination. Both of these are deliberate and planned actions to facilitate the gradual suppression of Hindu practices in a Christian missionary school setting works 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. 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 Kalawa 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. When an ostensibly secular institution imposes restrictions specifically targeting Hindu religious symbols, it reflects institutional prejudice against Hinduism. This form of targeted suppression echoes broader patterns where Hindu practices are curtailed under the guise of neutrality or discipline, often to appease other religious groups. 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. 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 when the prohibition and indoctrination started. Therefore, for documentation purposes, we have recorded the date based on when the incident was reported in the media: 8th December 2025.
Case Status
Complaint filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Christian Extremists
Perpetrators Range
Unknown
Perpetrators Gender
unknown
Sources 
