Hindu festival marred; traditional religious flags removed ahead of Navratri
Damoh, Madhya Pradesh, India 
28 March, 2025
Case Summary
In Damoh, Madhya Pradesh, local civic body official CMO Pradeep Sharma attempted to remove all Hindu religious flags installed by Hindu groups at Ghantaghar ahead of the Hindu festival of Navratri. In response, Hindu organisations and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) workers staged a massive protest, blocking roads and demanding Sharma’s immediate suspension. He was labelled as ‘anti-Sanatan’. According to news reports, a few members of a Hindu organisation were hoisting a flag at Ghanta Ghar for Navratri celebrations. Meanwhile, employees of the Municipal Corporation, acting on the orders of CMO Pradeep Sharma, stopped them and removed the flags. Sharma ordered the removal of the religious flags despite them being an integral part of the annual Navratri tradition. This sparked tensions in Damoh, which escalated further when some protestors blackened his face outside his residence. Speaking to the media, BJP leader Satish Tiwari stated, “Our opposition will continue against those who insult Sanatan Dharma.” The incident led to widespread protests by Hindu organisations, including the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), the BJP, and the Sakal Hindu Samaj. The demonstration lasted for nearly 90 minutes, during which only essential services were allowed through the blocked roads. The Hindu groups met with the District Collector and Superintendent of Police (SP) and demanded Sharma’s immediate suspension. They also demanded that he give a public apology. VHP district head Anuj Khatri said that Sharma should be removed from his position and asked to apologise for his actions. District Collector Sudhir Kochar confirmed that notices were issued regarding this matter. He also said that a report would be submitted to the state by 10th April 2025. SP Shrutikirti Somvanshi assured that a high-level inquiry would be conducted to prevent such incidents from recurring. Meanwhile, the police maintained strict surveillance to prevent any further unrest. State Minister for Tourism and Culture, Dharmendra Singh Lodhi, stated that the CMO should not have taken such an action, calling it completely unacceptable. He emphasised that removing the flag was inappropriate and condemnable. Councillors had already submitted a memorandum regarding the issue. Lodhi further assured the protestors that he would discuss the matter with Urban Administration Minister Kailash Vijayvargiya. He also reassured them that if the CMO was found to have acted wrongly, he would certainly face consequences.
Why it is Hate Crime ?
This case has been added to the tracker under two primary categories of the tracker. The first is- Restriction/ban on Hindu practices. Within this, the sub-category selected 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 second category under which this case has been placed is- Attack on Hindu religious representations, and within this, the sub-category selected is- Desecration of Hindu religious symbol. Icons and symbols or a religious representation of a spiritual ideal are widely revered in Hinduism. Iconography is of vital significance in the Hindu milieu. It helps connect people’s spiritual beliefs with the real world. Iconography within the Hindu faith takes several shapes and forms. Murtis are of most significance to Hindus, to which daily rituals, prayers and offerings are done. Besides the murtis, there are several other symbols which have deep significance in the Hindu faith – the Om and Swastika for example. Since these Hindu religious symbols hold paramount importance in Hinduism, any desecration of symbols, icons, murtis, religious representations and manifestations, is driven by animosity towards the faith itself which manifests itself through these murtis, icons and symbols. Therefore, any desecration of these Hindu religious symbols and representations is considered religiously motivated hate crimes under this category. The removal of Hindu religious flags in Damoh, Madhya Pradesh, ahead of Navratri celebrations is a blatant attempt to suppress Hindu religious expression and traditions. The fact that civic body official CMO Pradeep Sharma ordered the removal of these flags, despite them being an integral part of the annual festivities, demonstrates an intentional restriction on Hindu religious practices by the administration. This unjustified action aligns with the broader pattern of institutionalised bias where Hindu religious symbols and traditions face disproportionate restrictions, while similar curbs on other religious communities are rarely observed. By preventing Hindus from following their long-standing customs, the administration not only violated their religious rights but also displayed a clear prejudice against Hindu practices. Furthermore, the removal of these flags, which are seen as sacred by Hindu devotees, constitutes an act of desecration and disrespect toward Hindu religious sentiments. Because of their religious importance, these flags are powerful emblems of Hindu identity. It is seen as an insult to the Hindu faith to desecrate such flags or any other Hindu religious symbol, and anyone who engages in such criminal activity would only do so out of hatred for Hinduism. Given that the fundamental motivation behind these actions is contempt for the Hindu religion, this instance has been added to the tracker under the following category.
Case Status
Complaint filed
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
State and Establishment
Perpetrators Range
One Person
Perpetrators Gender
male
Sources 
