Secularism and BJP governments spending public money on celebration of Hindu festival

 

Secularism and BJP governments spending public money on celebration of Hindu festival

SR Darapuri I.P.S.(Retd)

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led governments in India, particularly at the state level (e.g., Uttar Pradesh under Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath), have allocated significant public funds to organize and promote major Hindu festivals. These include events like the Kumbh Mela and Ayodhya's Deepotsav. Such expenditures are often justified by the government as efforts to boost cultural heritage, tourism, and economic activity rather than purely religious promotion. However, critics, including opposition leaders and constitutional experts, argue that this practice contravenes India's secular framework by using taxpayer money to favor one religion, potentially violating principles of state neutrality.

 Key Examples of Public Spending

- Kumbh Mela (2025, Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh): The Uttar Pradesh government invested a record ₹70 billion (approximately £640 million) in infrastructure, sanitation, security, and publicity for the event, which drew an estimated 400 million devotees. This included a nationwide campaign featuring images of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath. The festival was framed as a blend of religious significance and modern development, with Modi personally participating in rituals. While attendance shattered records, a crowd crush in January 2025 resulted in at least 30 deaths, highlighting logistical challenges funded by public resources.

- Ayodhya Deepotsav (October 19, 2025, Uttar Pradesh): The state government organized a grand Diwali celebration, including the lighting of 150,000 oil lamps (diyas) along the Saryu River, a world-record aarti with 2,100 performers, light-and-sound shows, and fireworks. Chief Minister Adityanath led the event, which was promoted as a symbol of Lord Ram's return and a tourism draw. Exact expenditure figures were not publicly detailed, but opposition figures questioned the use of public funds for purchasing lamps and organizing rituals, estimating costs in crores of rupees based on similar past events.

These are not isolated; earlier instances include the 2019 Kumbh Mela, where the central government under Modi spent unprecedented sums (over ₹4,000 crore) on the event ahead of elections, blending religious grandeur with political messaging.

Constitutional Perspective on Secularism and Public Funding

India's Constitution enshrines secularism as a core principle, explicitly added to the Preamble in 1976 and affirmed as a "basic structure" by the Supreme Court in the 1994 S.R. Bommai case, meaning it cannot be altered by amendments. Relevant provisions under Articles 25–28 guarantee freedom of religion while mandating state neutrality:

Article 25: Freedom to profess, practice, and propagate religion, subject to public order, morality, and health.  Allows personal religious expression but permits state regulation to prevent favoritism. Festivals can be practiced privately, but state sponsorship risks unequal treatment.

Article 26:  Right of religious denominations to manage their affairs. Empowers communities to self-govern, reducing justification for state intervention or funding.

Article 27: No taxes shall be levied for the promotion or maintenance of any particular religion. Directly prohibits using public (taxpayer) funds to promote one faith, as it compels citizens to subsidize beliefs they may not share. Critics cite this as violated by festival spending, viewing it as indirect "promotion."

Article 28:  No religious instruction in state-funded institutions (with exceptions for endowed ones). Reinforces separation by barring state resources from religious education or worship, extending analogously to events.

Article 27 is pivotal: It bars the appropriation of tax proceeds for religious promotion, ensuring the state does not act as a patron. Legal scholars argue that funding Hindu-specific festivals like Deepotsav or Kumbh Mela breaches this by prioritizing one religion, potentially eroding equality under Article 14 (right to equality). The Supreme Court has not directly ruled on festival funding but has upheld secularism in related contexts, such as dismissing challenges to interfaith participation in state events (September 2025 judgment) and protecting minority rights in school funding cases.

Criticisms and Defenses

- Criticisms (Against Secularism): Opposition leaders like Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav have called such spending a "waste" and insensitive to fiscal priorities, urging a shift to year-round illuminations like Christmas abroad—sparking backlash for allegedly mocking Hindu traditions. Congress's Rashid Alvi echoed this, stating public funds for "religious matters like lamps" violate the Constitution.

 Broader concerns include politicization: Events like Kumbh Mela are seen as tools for BJP's Hindutva agenda, fostering a "Hindu Rashtra" narrative that sidelines minorities and undermines secularism. In 2023, Uttar Pradesh's allocation of funds for festivals like Ram Navami was labelled an "attempt to enmesh religion with administration."

- Defenses (Cultural, Not Religious):

 BJP leaders counter that these are cultural celebrations promoting unity and tourism, not religious endorsements. For instance, Uttar Pradesh Deputy CM Keshav Prasad Maurya accused critics of "insulting Hindu faith" for vote-bank politics, emphasizing diyas as symbols of harmony. The government argues such events generate economic benefits (e.g., jobs, pilgrim economy) and align with India's pluralistic heritage, where national holidays include festivals from multiple faiths (Diwali, Eid, Christmas). No major court has struck down these expenditures, suggesting a gray area where "cultural" framing provides leeway.

 Conclusion: A Contested Practice

Yes, BJP governments are spending public money on Hindu festivals, with documented examples totaling billions of rupees in recent years. Whether this is "against the concept of secularism" depends on interpretation: Legally, it treads close to Article 27's prohibition, raising valid concerns about state favouritism in a multi-religious society. Politically, it fuels debates on Hindutva's role in governance. For a definitive resolution, affected citizens could petition courts, but current practice persists amid ongoing contention. India's secularism remains aspirational—balancing faith with equality—rather than absolute.

Courtesy: Grok

A Majority of Police is Casteist and Communal

 

A Majority of Police is Casteist and Communal

by SR Darapuri ).P.S. (Retd)

The recent suicide by Y Pooran Kumar, a Dalit I.P.S.0fficer of Haryana has once  again given rise to the question about the caste discrimination within the police organisation itself. I served in the police department for 32 years in Uttar Pradesh and found that police is not only casteist but communal also. These biases operate not only while dealing with the public but also within the organisation itself. I am discussing below my own experience within the organisation. 

 

 Sometime back  a video of a police officer from Maharashtra, Bhagyashree Navtake had gone viral wherein she is seen bragging about how she files false cases against Dalits and Muslims and tortures them. It represents a crude but true picture of social prejudices in India’s police force.

It is a fact that after all our policemen come from the society, hence the police organisation is the true replica of our society. It is well known that our society is divided on caste, religion, communal and regional lines. Therefore, when the people from the society enter the police organisation they carry all their biases and prejudices with them. Rather they become stronger when such persons come to occupy positions of power. Their personal likes and dislikes; caste and communal prejudices influence their actions very strongly. These biases are often displayed in their behaviour and actions in situations where persons of other castes or communities are involved.

A situation of blatant caste discrimination came to my notice when I was posted as Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) Gorakhpur in 1976. As ASP I was in charge of Reserve Police Lines. On one Tuesday, which was a Parade Day, while taking a round of Police Mess I found that some persons were taking food sitting on the cemented tables and benches whereas some were sitting on the ground. It struck me as odd. I called one Head Constable and enquired about this dining situation. He told me that those sitting on the benches are high caste men and those sitting on the ground are low caste men. I was wonder struck to see this blatant display of caste discrimination in the Police Lines. I decided to end this discriminatory practice. Hence on the next occasion when I noticed the same situation I asked the policeman sitting on the ground to get up and sit on the benches. I had to repeat it once or twice and was able to discontinue this discriminatory practice of segregated dining. Incidentally during that very period I was asked by my boss to give a report on the observations made by the Commissioner for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes which in its report of 1974 had mentioned that there was a practice of segregated messing in Police Lines of eastern U.P. and Bihar. I told my boss that it was true and I had abolished this practice only recently. He told me that I should just mention that it is not there now. I don’t know about other districts of eastern U.P. but it was abolished by me in Gorakhpur district.

It came into news reported sometime back that even today the practice of not only segregated dining but there are separate barracks for high and low caste men in Bihar Police. It is shocking that it continues even today whereas Commissioner for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes had pointed out this discriminatory practice as back as 1974. Actually, the police force on account of its composition is dominated by high caste men and such discriminatory practices continue unabated. It is only due to reservation policy that some persons belonging to low castes especially Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (SCs and STs) have found a place in the police force which has made the force more secular and representative, however, minorities are still very poorly represented. But still the caste, communal and gender biases are quite strong in police men. This discrimination is also reflected in the treatment and posting of officers and employees of this category.

As we know there have been very frequent complaints of communal bias against Provincial Armed Constabulary in U.P. I found it to be true when I was posted as Commandant of 34 Bn P.A.C. Varanasi in 1979. On noticing it I had to make a lot of efforts to secularise my men. I always made it a point to sermonise them to be above caste and communal biases. I used to tell them that religion is your personal affair and you are only a policeman when you put on your uniform and are duty bound to act according to law. My constant briefing and debriefing had a very salutary effect on them and I was able to secularise my men. It came very clear in 1991 during a communal riot situation in Varanasi. The occasion was the General election of 1991. One retired I.P.S. officer Shri Chand Dixit was contesting election from Varanasi city as a Vishav Hindu Parishad (VHP) candidate. As usual VHP engineered a communal riot to keep the Muslims away from voting. As a result, a curfew was imposed. News appeared in the papers that PAC men had resorted to looting and beating up in a Muslim locality. I immediately started making an inquiry. To my surprise I found that these were not PAC men but Border Security Force (BSF) men who had resorted to looting, destroying property and beating up old men and women in the Muslim area. It shows that communal biases exist not only in PAC men but even among Central Para Military forces. No such complaint was received from the locality where men of my Battalion were posted.

I have experienced that the behaviour of lower ranks of police mainly depends on the behaviour and attitudes of the higher officers. If higher officers have caste and communal biases they are likely to accentuate the same among the men under them. I have personally seen many top-ranking police officers openly displaying their caste and communal biases. What to talk of lower ranks, even many I.P.S. officers do not show any change in their attitudes towards lower castes and other communities after such a rigorous training. Changing the attitude of a person is the most difficult thing because it requires a lot of effort to relieve one's ingrained prejudices and biases. Communal biases are so often displayed in so-called terror cases where there are a lot of complaints of false implications of Muslims.

It is also my personal experience that role models of the higher officers play a very important role in changing the attitudes and behaviour of lower ranks. As mentioned earlier, as Commandant of 34 Bn PAC I continuously briefed my men to be secular and free of caste and communal prejudices. My efforts gave a very good result during 1992 when the Ram Mandir movement was in full swing. One day Bajrang Dal people had planned to have a demonstration. They were to collect in the premises of the famous Hanuman Mandir of Varanasi city. The administration had planned to arrest them as soon as they came out of Mandir gate.  They had put PAC men to surround the agitators and put them in the buses. S.P. City and City Magistrate were on the spot. When the agitators came out of the gate the officers on duty ordered the PAC men to surround them and put them in the buses. But to their utter shock PAC men did not move at all and the agitators started moving towards the city. Then more PAC men had to be rushed to the spot from the City Control Room. As soon as they arrived, they surrounded the agitators and put them in the buses. Thus, a possible disturbance in the city could be avoided due to the prompt action of these PAC men. Happily, these PAC men belonged to my Battalion. The other PAC men who had refused to act belonged to another Battalion which was notorious for indiscipline. This prompt action by my men was appreciated by district administration and the recalcitrant PAC men were removed from the duty. The point which I am trying to make is that leadership in a uniform force makes a lot of difference.

As seen from the video of the Beed I.P.S. officer Bhagyashree Navtake, it is obvious that if officers like her occupy a position of authority they are likely to act in a partial manner. A constant watch needs to be kept on such officers. They should not be put on such duties where they can display their prejudices. It is also necessary to change the composition of the police force by recruiting more men from minorities to make it representative and secular. Training programmes for both officers and men should be organised to sensitise them about SC/ST, minorities and women issues. In practice the greatest influence on police behaviour is exerted by those in power, as the police are often considered the stick of those in power. If the government's agenda is caste and communal oppression, what can be expected from the police?

Dr. B. R. Ambedkar and his Experience of Untouchability in Post-Independence India

 

Dr. B. R. Ambedkar and his Experience of Untouchability in Post-Independence India

-         S. R. Darapuri

Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (1891–1956), the principal architect of the Indian Constitution and India’s first Law Minister, rose from the most oppressed social strata of Indian society — the so-called “untouchables.” Despite his towering intellect, education, and political status, he continued to experience subtle and overt forms of caste discrimination even after assuming ministerial office. This paper documents key instances of such discrimination, drawing from Ambedkar’s writings, speeches, and biographical accounts.

  1. Introduction
Dr. Ambedkar’s ascent to power symbolized a radical break from India’s caste hierarchy. Yet, the persistence of social prejudice against him illustrates the deep-rooted nature of caste in India’s political and bureaucratic structures. The following sections analyze verified incidents of caste-based discrimination that Ambedkar faced during his tenure as Minister of Law and Labour (1947–1951).

2. Social Ostracism by Colleagues
Even after joining Prime Minister Nehru’s Cabinet, Ambedkar was socially marginalized by his upper-caste colleagues. 
Dhananjay Keer (1954) notes: 
- “Even as a Minister, Dr. Ambedkar was treated with an air of condescension by some of his colleagues who could not forget his caste origin.”  He was rarely invited to informal gatherings and often felt socially isolated within the Cabinet. 
Eleanor Zelliot (1992) similarly observes: 
- “Ambedkar, despite his official position, found himself a stranger in the very government he helped to build. The social walls of caste did not crumble with constitutional change.”

 3. Bureaucratic Non-Cooperation
Ambedkar faced persistent resistance from upper-caste bureaucrats within his ministries. 
W. N. Kuber (1973) records that: 
- “His proposals often met with passive resistance from senior officers of traditional Hindu background. Their bias against an ‘untouchable’ minister was thinly veiled.” 
In a letter to V. K. Krishna Menon (1949), Ambedkar reportedly wrote: 
- “The machinery of the Ministry is slow, not by nature but by design. I sometimes wonder whether they obey me because of my office or disobey me because of my birth.”

 4. The Hindu Code Bill Controversy
Ambedkar’s introduction of the Hindu Code Bill — aimed at granting women equal property and marital rights — provoked fierce backlash. 
According to Partha Chatterjee (1993): 
“The opposition to the Hindu Code Bill took an explicitly casteist tone; Ambedkar was denounced as an ‘untouchable reformer’ who had no right to reinterpret the shastras.” 
Ambedkar’s resignation in 1951 was a response to both political betrayal and the social prejudice embedded in the opposition.

 5. Incidents During Official Visits
Even during official tours, caste discrimination surfaced. 
Dhananjay Keer (1954) recounts that during one visit to central India, local officials served Ambedkar in separate utensils, following the custom applied to untouchables. Ambedkar refused the food and sharply rebuked them, saying: 
- “I did not come here to be reminded of the village well.”

 6. Post-Resignation Isolation
After Ambedkar’s resignation from Nehru’s Cabinet in 1951, no Congress leader publicly acknowledged his contributions. 
Eleanor Zelliot (1977) writes: 
- “After his resignation, there was a conspicuous silence from his Cabinet colleagues. His social isolation mirrored the continuing caste barriers in political life.” 
In a private letter to Nehru (1952), Ambedkar lamented: 
- “I have been used and discarded. The cause of the Depressed Classes remains as neglected as ever.” 
(Cited in Vasant Moon, *Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches*, Vol. 12.)

 7. Ambedkar’s Own Reflections
In the Constituent Assembly (November 1949), Ambedkar captured this contradiction: 
- “We are entering into a life of contradictions. In politics we have equality, and in social and economic life we have inequality. How long shall we continue to live this life of contradictions?” 
This was not mere rhetoric — it reflected his own experience as a minister still marked by caste bias.

 8. Conclusion
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar’s life as a minister demonstrates that untouchability and caste discrimination transcended individual success. His experiences reveal that constitutional equality alone could not dismantle social prejudice deeply rooted in Hindu society and the state apparatus. Ambedkar’s struggle — even at the highest level of governance — remains a powerful reminder that social democracy must accompany political democracy for genuine equality to prevail in India.

 References:
- Chatterjee, P. (1993). *The Nation and Its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories.* Princeton University Press. 
- Keer, D. (1954). *Dr. Ambedkar: Life and Mission.* Bombay: Popular Prakashan. 
- Kuber, W. N. (1973). *Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: A Critical Study.* New Delhi: People’s Publishing House. 
- Moon, V. (Ed.). (1995). *Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches*, Vol. 12. Government of Maharashtra. 
- Zelliot, E. (1977). *Ambedkar’s Conversion and the Dalit Future.* In *From Untouchable to Dalit: Essays on the Ambedkar Movement.* 
- Zelliot, E. (1992). *From Untouchable to Dalit: Essays on the Ambedkar Movement.* Manohar Publishers.