Restrictions imposed on Hindu festivities ahead of Ram Navami, administration bans DJ music

Case ID : f664a0f | Location : Giridih, Jharkhand, India | Date of Incident : Wed, 26 March, 2025
Case ID : f664a0f
location Giridih, Jharkhand, India
date 26 March, 2025
Restrictions imposed on Hindu festivities ahead of Ram Navami, administration bans DJ music
Restriction/ban on Hindu practices
Restriction on expression of Hindu identity
Administration disallows religious procession
Religious procession

Case Summary

Ahead of the upcoming Ram Navami and Eid festivals in 2025, peace committee meetings convened across several communally sensitive areas to ensure order and harmony. However, while some discussions emphasised mutual respect, others have disproportionately restricted Hindu festivities. In Jharkhand’s Tisri block, a peace committee meeting was held at the Tisri police station under the leadership of Inspector Pascal Topo and Station In-Charge Ranjay Kumar. During the meeting, members of various Ram Navami Puja Committees submitted requests for procession licences and detailed their respective routes. However, the police issued strict directives prohibiting the use of DJ music during the Ram Navami procession. Station In-Charge Kumar explicitly warned that any violation would result in the confiscation of DJ equipment and legal action against the organisers. Similar restrictions were imposed elsewhere in Jharkhand. The Sub-Divisional Police Officer (SDPO) in Giridih declared a complete ban on DJ music during the Ram Navami procession. In Chatra, authorities directed the Puja Committee to avoid playing ‘offensive’ songs, while in Saraikela and Birni, police mandated a ban on ‘provocative’ or ‘obscene’ songs, warning that any content perceived as inciting Muslims would lead to action against organisers. Despite these stringent measures targeting Hindu celebrations, no equivalent restrictions were announced for Eid, raising concerns over the selective enforcement of regulations under the guise of maintaining communal peace.

Why it is Hate Crime ?

This case has been added under the primary category- Restriction/Ban on Hindu Practices. The first 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 subcategory selected is- Administration disallows religious procession, and the tertiary category chosen within this 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 categorised 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. This case has been added to the Hinduphobia Tracker as it highlights institutional prejudice against Hindu religious expressions. Ram Navami is an important religious procession, and halting the DJ sound system under the pretext of maintaining public order, specifically in a Hindu event, raises serious concerns about bias. 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. This incident reflects a broader issue of selective restrictions, where Hindu religious expressions are consistently regulated, limited, or obstructed in areas with significant Muslim populations. This action is discriminatory and indicative of religious bias. Consequently, this incident is being categorised as a religiously motivated hate crime against Hindus.

Case Status Background
Gavel Icon

Case Status


Unknown

Case Status Background
Gavel Icon

Perpetrators Details

Perpetrators


State and Establishment

Perpetrators Range


N/A

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: f664a0f <click to copy case id>, you must enter the same in the form which will pop up after clicking the button.