A controversial advisory issued by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), mandating that only Hindus be permitted entry to Garba events in Maharashtra and requiring Aadhaar card verification for participants, has ignited a heated exchange between the state’s ruling and opposition parties.
Shriraj Nair, the VHP national spokesperson, clarified the organization’s stance, stating, “Garba transcends mere dance; it is a sacred act of worship intended to honor the goddess. Individuals who do not adhere to idol worship [an apparent reference to Muslims] should not participate. Only those who genuinely believe in these rituals should be permitted.” He further recommended that organizers apply ’tilak’ to participants and ensure they perform traditional prayers before entering the event. Nair emphasized, “VHP and Bajrang Dal volunteers will oversee these events, reinforcing that Garba is a spiritual observance, not a recreational activity.”
This VHP advisory has garnered support from Maharashtra Revenue Minister and prominent BJP leader Chandrashekhar Bawankule, who publicly backed the Hindutva group. Conversely, Congress leader Vijay Wadettiwar vehemently criticized the directive, warning that it could severely disrupt social harmony.
Minister Bawankule defended the VHP’s position, asserting, “They have every right to issue such advisories. The crucial aspect is whether the event has obtained proper police permission. Organizing committees should make their decisions accordingly.”
In response to the VHP’s contentious move, Vijay Wadettiwar, leader of the Maharashtra Congress Legislature Party and former State Minister, accused the VHP of malicious intent: “Their aim is to ignite societal conflict, to create divisions along religious lines, and to exploit these tensions for political gain. The VHP’s current stance is hardly surprising; the organization itself originated with the goal of destabilizing the nation.” Wadettiwar further argued that such directives from groups like the VHP undermine India’s fundamental principle of “unity in diversity,” suggesting that this position implicitly aligns with the government’s own views.