Saraswati Puja restricted at Hooghly's primary school following objections from local Muslims affiliated with ruling party
Hooghly district, West Bengal, India 
5 February, 2025
Case Summary
In Hooghly district, West Bengal, Saraswati Puja was not celebrated at Balai Beria Primary School due to objections from the local Muslim community. For the last five years, the school did not observe the festival, which led to protests by the local Hindus. BJP leader Amit Malviya stated that the Muslims who objected to the celebration of Saraswati Puja in the primary school were associated with the state-ruled Trinamool Congress party. The situation escalated as the Hindu community expressed their anger over the denial of the festival. The village, where this incident occurred, falls under the jurisdiction of Haripal Police Station. The police were informed, but no significant action was reported.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The case has been added to the tracker under the prime category of- Restriction/ban on Hindu practices. Under this, the first sub-category 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 second sub-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. Here, Saraswati Puja, a revered Hindu festival, was not celebrated at a primary School due to objections from the local Muslim community. It is further stated that the festival has not been celebrated in the school for the last five years. The five-year-long restriction on a traditional Hindu festival in an educational institution signifies a deliberate attempt to suppress Hindu religious practices under pressure from an intolerant section of society. It is important to mention here that every individual has the right to practice their religious faith and restricting someone from doing that can also be considered a prejudicial order denying the Hindu community its fundamental rights. Such arbitrary actions taken against Hindus are prejudicial to the rights of Hindus and stem from animosity and prejudice against Hindu beliefs, which is why this case is being categorised as a religiously motivated hate crime. Furthermore, BJP leader Amit Malviya’s statement linking the opposing Muslim group to the ruling Trinamool Congress (TMC) raises concerns about political appeasement enabling religious suppression. Notably, this decision to prohibit Saraswati Puja at Balai Beria Primary School is not just an isolated incident but part of a larger pattern of discrimination against Hindus in West Bengal, considering that the state government, under Mamata Banerjee, has repeatedly displayed bias against Hindu religious practices. This denial of religious expression is a direct infringement on the constitutional rights of Hindus, particularly their freedom of expression and religious practice, which are fundamental rights under Articles 19 and 25 of the Indian Constitution. Moreover, this pattern of anti-Hindu policies is evident in the state's history of suppressing Hindu religious sentiments, including arresting Hindus for chanting "Jai Shri Ram", denying permissions for Hindu processions, and remaining silent when Hindus are attacked by Islamists. The Mamata Banerjee government’s consistent appeasement of Muslims, while clamping down on Hindu religious expressions, indicates a politically and religiously motivated agenda aimed at curtailing Hindu cultural identity in the state. By repeatedly siding with Islamist elements, her administration has fostered an environment where Hindus feel like second-class citizens in their own land, making this not just an act of discrimination but a systematic effort to suppress Hindu religious rights.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
State and Establishment
Perpetrators Range
Unknown
Perpetrators Gender
unknown
Sources 
