Hindu devotees face police crackdown and restrictions during Ram Navami procession in Wadala
Wadala, Maharashtra, India 
19 April, 2025
Case Summary
In Wadala, Mumbai, tensions flared between Hindu devotees and the local police after the authorities denied permission for a Ram Navami procession. Despite weeks of preparation and having followed due process to seek formal approval, the permission was abruptly withheld at the last moment without clear justification. The sudden denial, viewed by many as discriminatory and unjustified, sparked outrage among the devotees who had gathered peacefully for the religious event. Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) Mohit Garg stated that there was permission for the procession to be taken out on April 6, 2025, the day of Ram Navami. However, no fresh approval was granted to the Hindu groups for the April 20 procession. As Hindu groups proceeded to begin the procession from Shri Bhole Mandir to Hanuman Tekdi Mandir — a route central to their celebration — they were met with heavy police deployment. Allegations soon emerged that the police used excessive force to disperse the participants, with at least six Hindu activists reportedly injured in the scuffle. Eyewitnesses stated that police resorted to lathi-charge tactics to quell the crowd. The police, however, denied the use of force. Around 30 devotees, including local leaders and activists of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal, were detained during the crackdown. This prompted a large crowd of nearly a thousand Hindus to gather outside the Wadala police station in protest. The demonstrators raised slogans of “Jai Shri Ram,” recited the Hanuman Chalisa, and staged a sit-in, refusing to leave until the detained were released and the procession allowed to continue. The protest lasted over an hour, drawing significant public and political attention. Maharashtra Minister Mangal Prabhat Lodha intervened and held discussions with police officials, ultimately leading to the release of the detainees and the reinstatement of the procession. The rally finally resumed under tight security, with over a thousand devotees participating peacefully. The incident sparked criticism of the police for what many perceived as heavy-handedness and an unjust curtailing of Hindu religious rights.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under the first prime category- Restriction/Ban on Hindu Practices. The sub-category relevant within this 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 relevant in this case is- Administration disallows religious procession, and within it, the tertiary category selected is- Religious procession. In several cases, it is seen that the administration/state disallows a religious procession 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 procession, by pressure groups that harbour animosity towards Hindus, intrinsic to their faith. Since the religious procession is inherent 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 procession 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 process 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 second category selected is- Attack not resulting in death, and under this, the sub-category chosen is- Attack on religious procession. The outward celebration and display of religious symbols in an intrinsic part of Hinduism. Religious processions on various festivals are age-old traditions and a way to manifest faith and form a part of the religious practices of Hindus. On several occasions, such religious processions come under attack by non-Hindu mobs, in a manifestation of their animosity towards Hinduism and their practices. The reasons cited for such violent attacks are many and range from crossing a non-Hindu resident-dominated area to playing loud music, crossing from an area where there is a religious structure of another faith etc. The violent attacks are triggered by the outward display of religiosity by Hindus. The attacks are mainly a manifestation of religious supremacist doctrine which believes that idolatry, essentially the Hindu faith, is one that deserves to be annihilated since the very tenets of Hinduism, its practices and traditions are considered a sin in those doctrines. Since these attacks emanate from intrinsic and doctrinal animosity towards Hindus and Hinduism, it is considered a religiously motivated hate crime under this category. This case is categorised as a hate crime because it involves the restriction of a Hindu religious procession by the state administration, specifically targeting the expression of Hindu identity. The denial of permission for the Ram Navami procession, despite its religious significance and established traditions across India, constitutes a prejudicial act that curtails the fundamental rights of Hindus to publicly practise and celebrate their faith. Such restrictions are often imposed due to pressure from groups harbouring animosity towards Hindus, or from a desire to pre-empt unrest by appeasing those who may be provoked by Hindu religious expressions, rather than upholding equal rights for all communities. By selectively disallowing the procession and intervening only in the case of Hindu religious events, the administration’s actions reflect bias and discrimination against the Hindu community. The targeted prohibition of a core religious practice—such as the Ram Navami procession—demonstrates that the restriction is motivated by hostility or prejudice towards the Hindu faith, thus meeting the criteria of thus meeting the criteria of a religiously motivated hate crime under the tracker’s definition.
Victim Details
Total Victim
6
Deceased
0
Gender
- Male 6
- Female 0
- Third Gender 0
- Unknown 0
Caste
- SC/ST 0
- OBC 0
- General 0
- Unknown 6
Age Group
- Minor 0
- Adult 6
- Senior Citizen 0
- Unknown 0
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
State and Establishment
Perpetrators Range
Unknown
Perpetrators Gender
unknown
Sources 
