Restriction/Ban on Hindu Practices

A Hate Crime essentially has two important ingredients – an underlying offence which has been committed coupled with a bias. A hate crime is supposed to have taken place when the perpetrator intentionally targets an individual or a property owing to his/her bias against a certain characteristic of that individual or his/her hatred towards that characteristic.

While these characteristics could be many, for example, race, colour, regional identity, sexual orientation etc, for the purpose of this category under the Hinduphobia Tracker, we would consider only religious identity and the faith professed by the victim (specifically the Hindu faith) as a characteristic underlying the motivation of the crime against him/her.

Restricting religious practices by non-Hindu groups harbouring animosity towards Hindus or the State implementing targeted and/or prejudicial policies specifically against Hindus as a hate crime involves actions and/or policies that stop the religious expression in the form of processions, rituals, display of religious symbols, celebration of festivals targeted towards a specific religious group – in this case – the Hindus. 

Restrictive actions could include banning the expression/display of religious symbols, prohibiting certain religious practices, targeting religious gatherings, restriction on building places of worship, restrictions imposed on conducting religious rituals/puja etc and targeted and/or prejudicial policies by the state specifically against the Hindu community. 

International conventions and the United Nations too classify restrictions on religious practices as violations of fundamental human rights. In India, the restrictions come from multiple sources. The restriction on religious practices could come from non-Hindu religious denominations owing to their intolerance and animosity towards Hindus, Hinduism and their religious practices and/or the state itself when it clamps down on religious processions, religious practices and rituals of Hindus for reasons like ensuring that those who harbour animosity towards Hinduism don’t get ‘provoked’ into violence. 

The restriction of Hindu religious practices in order to assuage the intolerance of non-Hindu communities can be viewed as the denial of the fundamental rights of the Hindu community on an individual and community level. In this category, therefore, we would document restriction/ban on Hindu religious practices not just by non-Hindu groups but also by the state. 

Religiously motivated hate crimes under this category ‘Restriction/Ban on Hindu practices’ would be divided into the following sub-categories:

1. Restriction on expression of Hindu identity
2. Administration disallows religious procession
   1. Religious procession
   1. Religious congregation/event
   1. Rally for Hindu rights
3. Administration restricting religious practice

Why and how it’s a hate crime

International conventions on freedom to profess religion 

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in Art. 18 (1) says, “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom […] either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.”

Further, in Art. 18 (3), ICCPR says, “Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.”

In the 1981 Declaration of the General Assembly, the right to manifest faith is also outlined. 

Art. 1 (1): “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have a religion or whatever belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.”

Art. 1 (3): “Freedom to manifest one’s religion or belief may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.”

The Human Rights Committee general comment 22 mentions, “The freedom to manifest religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching encompasses a broad range of acts. The concept of worship extends to ritual and ceremonial acts giving direct expression to belief, as well as various practices integral to such acts, including the building of places of worship, the use of ritual formulae, and objects, the display of symbols, and the observance of holidays and days of rest. The observance and practice of religion or belief may include not only ceremonial acts but also such customs as the observance of dietary regulations, the wearing of distinctive clothing or head coverings, participation in rituals associated with certain stages of life, and the use of a particular language, customarily spoken by a group. In addition, the practice and teaching of religion or belief include acts integral to the conduct by religious groups of their basic affairs, such as freedom to choose their religious leaders, priests and teachers, the freedom to establish seminaries or religious schools and the freedom to prepare and distribute religious texts or publications.”

Further, the 1981 Declaration of the General Assembly also mentions in Art. 6 (h) that “The right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief includes the freedom, “To observe days of rest and to celebrate holidays and ceremonies in accordance with the precepts of one’s religion or belief;”.

The last part of this section of the UDHR says that individuals and groups have the freedom to ‘manifest their religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance’.

UDHR further says:

Freedom to Manifest Religion or Belief in Worship, Observance, Practice, and Teaching [UDHR, Art. 18, ICCPR, Art. 18(1), UN 1981 Dec., Art. 1, OSCE Vienna Document, Art. 16(d)]

1. This freedom may be exercised in public or in private, individually or in community with others.
2. This freedom, at a minimum, encompasses the following freedoms:
3. To worship or assemble in connection with a religion or belief, and to establish and maintain, including the building of places of worship, freely accessible places for these purposes;
4. To establish and maintain appropriate charitable or humanitarian institutions, and seminaries or religious schools;
5. To make, acquire and use to an adequate extent the necessary articles and materials related to the rites or customs of a religion or belief, including the use of ritual formulae and objects, the display of symbols, observance of dietary regulations, the wearing of distinctive clothing or head coverings, participation in rituals associated with certain stages of life, and the use of a particular language customarily spoken by a group;
6. To write, issue and disseminate relevant publications in these areas;
7. To teach a religion or belief in places suitable for these purposes;
8. To solicit and receive voluntary financial and other contributions from individuals and institutions;
9. To organize, train, appoint, elect, designate by succession, or replace appropriate leaders, priests and teachers called for by the requirements and standards of any religion or belief;
10. To observe days of rest and to celebrate holidays and ceremonies in accordance with the precepts of one’s religion or belief; and
11. To establish and maintain communications with individuals and communities in matters of religion and belief at the national and international levels.

Per the International Conventions of Human Rights, it thus becomes apparent that any religious denomination and/or group and/or faction has the right to manifest their faith in the manner that their faith demands – including religious practices, subject to public morality, order, health and morals. Any restriction on the manifestation of the faith of the Hindus constitutes a violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms and constitutes an affront to human dignity either by the state or by other religious groups owing to animosity towards that particular faith. 

Religious freedoms in India 

The freedom to manifest religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching encompasses a broad range of acts. The concept of worship extends to ritual and ceremonial acts giving direct expression to belief, as well as various practices integral to such acts, including the building of places of worship, the use of ritual formulae, and objects, and the display of symbols. The observance and practice of religion or belief may include not only ceremonial acts but also such customs as the observance of dietary regulations, keeping shikha or wearing certain kinds of clothing which are part of the religious observance of that particular sect of Hindus, taking out religious processions, donning symbols of religiosity as deemed appropriate by the individual in accordance with the sect of Hinduism the individual follows etc. In addition, religious books and texts also have religiosity attached to them intrinsically. Religious texts hold great meaning for Hindus and are also considered symbols and icons that are worshipped.

In India, freedom to profess and manifest religion is a fundamental right enshrined in the Constitution of India. 

The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 also considers the freedom to practice religion as a basic human rights, in accordance with the fundamental right enshrined in the Constitution of India. 

Section 2(d) of the Act defines human rights as individual rights to life, liberty, equality, and dignity guaranteed by the Constitution or recognized in international covenants and enforceable by Indian courts. The abovementioned definition, however, limits the scope of the functions of the National Human Rights Commission. As a result, India ratified only the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. However, the covenants are not directly enforceable as law in Indian courts. Therefore, under the Protection of Human Rights Act 1993, the definition of human rights is firmly limited to the fundamental rights included in Part Ill of the Constitution, which are enforceable by Indian courts.

Be that as it may, the act, which led to the creation of the Human Rights Commission, also aims to protect abuses of power committed by state bodies.

Therefore, according to Indian laws, the Indian Constitution and the Protection of Human Rights Act 1993, any infringement on the religious practices of religious denominations, Hindus in this case, is a human rights violation and discriminatory practice, unless it falls under the reasonable restrictions imposed by the state, whether the restriction is by the state or other religious denominations. 

Sub-categories and why it’s a hate crime

Restriction on expression of Hindu identity

In several cases, there is a concerted effort or prejudicial order/policy restricting Hindus from expressing their Hindu identity. Expression of Hindu religious identity involves several activities. Religious processions, display of religious symbols, wearing religious symbols, participating in religious festivals, participating in and conducting religious rituals, prayer congregations, building temples and places of worship etc. These could be affected by non-Hindu groups of people and/or institutions who harbour animosity towards Hindus, Hinduism and their religious practices and/or the State by passing/implementing prejudicial orders specifically targeting the Hindu community. 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 it 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. 

Administration disallows 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 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 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. 

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. 

Parameters applied

1. The restriction must be on a Hindu festival, practice and/or ritual, or tradition for it to be documented under this category. 
2. The restriction must be prejudicial towards Hindus/sects of Hindus/groups of Hindus/Individual Hindus/Hindu rights and faith.
3. This category of hate crime will include restrictions on Hindu practices either by non-Hindu groups, groups that harbour animosity towards Hindus and Hindu practices or the State itself. 
4. When the state restricts Hindu practices, the reasons often cited are those of reasonable restrictions mentioned in the Constitution of India viz law and order, public order and the potential to cause public safety hazards. More often than not, these reasons do not hold water when analysed dispassionately. Cases where the reasons cited by the state administration or the judiciary, when analysed, fail to substantiate the need for the restriction will also be charted as a hate crime under this category. 
5. In cases where ‘law and order’ or ‘public order’ is cited as a reason for the administration to restrict a religious practice specifically for Hindus, the primary concern is often the ‘offence’ that it would cause to the very groups which harbour animosity towards Hindus and their faith. 
6. Such orders by the State (administration and/or Judiciary and/or govt) 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 intrinsic to the faith of the Hindus, such prejudicial restriction is considered a curtailing of the fundamental rights of the Hindu community.
7. Instances in which the prohibition is selectively enforced against one religious group (Hindus) while others are allowed to proceed would also be categorized as a hate crime under this category since it infringes on the rights of the Hindus. 
8. Non-Hindu groups restricting Hindus from displaying their Hindu identity, often by restricting the expression of faith – a fundamental right – would also be considered a hate crime under this category. 
9. If a restriction is imposed by the state on all faiths – for example – the disallowing of the usage of loudspeakers for all faith beyond a certain decibel level – it will not be considered a religiously motivated hate crime in this category. 

Laws in India about restriction on religious practices

There are several laws and sections of the IPC which are invoked by the law enforcement agencies in case of any religious denomination restricting another religious denomination from displaying their faith according to the circumstances of the case. Most common are IPC sections 109 (abetment of an offence), 153 (provocation with intent to cause riot), 153A(2) [Promoting enmity between two groups (offence committed in place of worship)], 295 (defiling a place of worship), 295A (outrage religious feelings), 296 (disturbing religious assembly), 120B (criminal conspiracy) and 34 (common intention).

There is no law under which the state can specifically be prosecuted for infringing on the human rights of Hindus. There are also no specific hate crime laws designed for this specific action by the state or religious denominations. When such instances occur by the state, religious denominations can approach the court and in some cases, the judiciary strikes down the restriction imposed by the state. However, there is no provision to prosecute the state for the infringement. Further, there are also no provisions if the judiciary itself infringes on the fundamental right to manifest faith.