A Shrine, A Plaque, A Storm
By: Javid Amin | 08 September 2025
The Hazratbal shrine in Srinagar, revered as one of Kashmir’s holiest sites, has often been associated with spirituality, faith, and calm. But in September 2025, it became the epicenter of a political and religious confrontation that spilled into Kashmir’s already turbulent socio-political landscape.
At the heart of the controversy lies an inauguration plaque bearing the National Emblem of India—the Ashoka lions—installed within the shrine’s compound by the Jammu & Kashmir Waqf Board. What might have been viewed elsewhere as a symbol of governance and state recognition triggered outrage in Kashmir’s deeply spiritual and religiously sensitive context.
The incident not only ignited a fierce religious debate but also snowballed into a political standoff, with the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) accusing police of bias and selective accountability after refusing to lodge an FIR against Waqf Board Chairperson Darakhshan Andrabi.
FIR Refused: PDP Alleges Bias in Plaque Controversy
On September 6, 2025, PDP President Mehbooba Mufti revealed that her party had approached the Nigeen Police Station seeking registration of an FIR against Darakhshan Andrabi. The allegation: that she had hurt the religious sentiments of Muslims by authorizing installation of the plaque at Hazratbal.
But the police declined.
In a strongly worded post on X (formerly Twitter), Mehbooba Mufti wrote:
“Given the gravity of the offence—deliberately hurting the religious sentiments of Muslims and thereby provoking them—I urge @JmuKmrPolice to initiate an FIR immediately.”
Following the refusal, PDP announced it would now move to Hazratbal Police Station and, if required, explore legal remedies in court.
This incident became more than a local complaint—it turned into a symbol of alleged state bias and administrative high-handedness, fueling opposition anger.
The Plaque Incident: What Sparked the Outrage?
The controversy traces back to Friday, September 5, 2025, when worshippers at Hazratbal noticed a newly installed inauguration plaque inside the compound. Alongside the names of Waqf Board officials, the plaque prominently displayed the Ashoka lions, India’s national emblem.
For many devotees, this was unacceptable. The imagery was likened to an idol-like figure, seen as inappropriate within Islamic sacred space.
-
By late afternoon, angered worshippers vandalized the plaque.
-
Videos showing the emblem being smashed and removed went viral on social media.
-
The Waqf Board defended the installation, calling it a standard practice for public projects.
Yet the damage was done. What could have been dismissed as a bureaucratic oversight instead touched raw nerves, triggering religious, political, and legal battles.
Political and Religious Reactions
The plaque controversy quickly spiraled into a larger confrontation, drawing in politicians, religious leaders, and civil society.
National Conference (NC)
-
Omar Abdullah, NC Vice President, called the move a “mistake” and demanded an apology from Andrabi.
-
Tanvir Sadiq, NC spokesperson, argued that the plaque’s placement violated the principle of Tawheed (oneness of God). He accused the administration of “provoking believers and criminalizing their reaction.”
Mutahida Majlis-e-Ulema (MMU)
-
The MMU, an umbrella body of 20+ Islamic organizations, condemned the move, describing Hazratbal as Kashmir’s “spiritual heart” that must remain free of state symbolism.
Religious Scholars
-
Grand Mufti Nasir-ul-Islam labeled the decision “extremely unfortunate” and demanded its reversal.
Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)
-
PDP leaders intensified their attack, alleging that the police acted swiftly against worshippers who vandalized the plaque but refused accountability against those who installed it.
-
Iltija Mufti indicated the party might seek judicial intervention if the police continued resisting registration of an FIR against Andrabi.
Legal and Ethical Debate
The Hazratbal plaque row has now sparked a layered debate on law, accountability, and religious sensitivity.
FIR Against Worshippers, Not Officials
-
Police registered FIR No. 76/2025 against those involved in vandalizing the plaque.
-
Detainees risk being charged under the Public Safety Act (PSA).
Selective Accountability?
Opposition parties argue:
-
The cause of outrage was the installation of the emblem.
-
Yet police targeted only the reaction, not the provocation.
-
This, they say, sets a dangerous precedent of one-sided law enforcement.
Constitutional Questions
-
Can national symbols be placed in spaces of religious worship without consultation?
-
Where does the line fall between state authority and religious autonomy?
-
Should religious sensitivities be protected under law when weighed against national symbolism?
These questions remain unsettled, leaving a grey zone that is easily politicized.
Editorial Analysis: Symbolism, Sentiment, and State Power
This controversy is more than a simple dispute over a plaque. It reflects deeper tensions in Kashmir:
-
State Symbolism vs. Religious Autonomy
-
The Ashoka lions, emblematic of India’s sovereignty, were read in Kashmir as an intrusion into sacred religious space.
-
The backlash shows the fragile balance between national identity and local spiritual traditions.
-
-
Selective Accountability
-
Police acted promptly against worshippers but avoided action against Waqf authorities.
-
This selective enforcement fuels perceptions of bias and injustice.
-
-
Political Capital
-
Opposition parties like PDP and NC see the controversy as an opportunity to rally public opinion.
-
For the ruling administration, it becomes a test of its ability to manage sentiment without appearing partial.
-
-
Religious Sensitivity in Conflict Zones
-
In a region already marked by mistrust, even symbolic acts can trigger disproportionate reactions.
-
Dialogue and consultation—not unilateral decisions—are essential in such contexts.
-
The Way Forward: Balancing Faith and Governance
To move beyond the plaque controversy, Kashmir’s leadership and administration must adopt a balanced, transparent approach.
-
Dialogue First
-
Engage religious scholars, civil society, and political parties before installing any state symbols in religious spaces.
-
-
Equal Accountability
-
If devotees face FIRs for vandalism, authorities responsible for provocation must also face inquiry.
-
Justice cannot appear selective.
-
-
Clear Policy Framework
-
Define guidelines for state symbols in religious premises to avoid ambiguity.
-
-
Sensitivity in Governance
-
Recognize that in a conflict-sensitive zone, even symbolic acts can inflame tensions.
-
Policies must prioritize community trust over bureaucratic procedure.
-
Conclusion: Accountability Must Be Balanced
The Hazratbal plaque row is a lesson in how symbols carry weight far beyond their material form. What may be seen in Delhi as a matter of protocol is read in Srinagar as state intrusion into sacred space.
By refusing to file an FIR against Waqf Board Chairperson Darakhshan Andrabi while targeting worshippers, the police risk reinforcing a narrative of partiality and injustice.
If Kashmir is to heal and move toward peace, governance must be fair, transparent, and sensitive. Only by holding all parties equally accountable can the administration hope to prevent such controversies from spiraling into deeper divisions.
Hazratbal deserves to remain a place of faith, not friction. And accountability, if it is to mean anything, must apply to everyone equally—whether they are worshippers, politicians, or state-appointed officials.
