Hazratbal Shrine Controversy – Omar Abdullah, Mehbooba Mufti, Grand Mufti on Ashoka Emblem Row in Kashmir
By: Javid Amin | 06 September 2025
When Symbols Clash with Sentiments
In Kashmir, shrines are not just stone and marble—they are repositories of memory, devotion, and identity. Among them, Hazratbal Shrine in Srinagar holds a special place. Housing the Moi-e-Muqqadas (a relic of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ), it is regarded as the Valley’s most sacred site, a place where spiritual reverence transcends politics.
Yet in September 2025, Hazratbal became the center of a storm—not of nature, but of symbols and ego. A newly installed marble plaque bearing the Ashoka Emblem, India’s national symbol, alongside the name of Jammu & Kashmir Waqf Board Chairperson Dr. Darakhshan Andrabi, triggered widespread outrage.
For worshippers, the emblem represented political intrusion into a spiritual space. For leaders across the spectrum, it was a symbolic overreach. And for the administration, it soon spiraled into a law-and-order challenge, as protests and vandalism turned the plaque into rubble.
This is not just about a stone—it is about the tug of war between faith and power, humility and ego, governance and sentiment.
Omar Abdullah’s Response: “Shrines Are Not Government Offices”
Former Jammu & Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah was among the first to voice his disapproval. His critique was sharp, yet rooted in principle.
“I have not seen the use of emblems in any religious place. What was the need of placing the plaque?”
He reminded people that shrines, mosques, temples, gurdwaras, and dargahs are not government institutions. They do not require state branding or emblems to validate their sanctity.
Omar invoked the legacy of Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, who oversaw the shaping of Hazratbal’s modern structure. Sheikh Abdullah never sought credit through plaques or symbols; his work spoke for itself, remembered by people without markers of vanity.
“First, you hurt people’s sentiments. Then you threaten them.” — Omar Abdullah, on the Waqf Board’s response.
By highlighting humility as governance, Omar positioned the controversy not merely as a religious blunder, but as a failure of leadership sensitivity.
Ruhullah Mehdi: “Egos Cannot Be Monumentalised in Sacred Spaces”
Joining Omar Abdullah, Mehbooba Mufti, and the Grand Mufti, Srinagar MP Aga Syed Ruhullah Mehdi has also spoken out strongly against the installation of the Ashoka Emblem at Hazratbal Shrine. His remarks cut to the heart of the matter: faith and humility versus ego and self-glorification.
Ruhullah’s Key Points
-
He described the emblem installation as an attempt to “monumentalise egos”, not an act of devotion.
-
He emphasized that while Hazratbal has undergone renovations before, never were such symbols of credit-seeking imposed.
-
He rejected the Waqf Board’s call for PSA action against protestors, calling it “foolish, unacceptable, and an assault on people’s attachment to their beloved shrine.”
-
He demanded legal scrutiny of those responsible for the emblem’s placement, not the worshippers who reacted emotionally to a provocation.
Why Ruhullah’s Intervention Matters
Ruhullah’s stance reframes the controversy beyond simple vandalism or protest. He identifies it as a clash between institutional arrogance and public reverence, where sacred devotion was challenged by political branding.
By aligning with Omar Abdullah and Mehbooba Mufti, Ruhullah strengthens the cross-party consensus that accountability lies with the Waqf Board’s decision-making—not with worshippers defending the sanctity of Hazratbal.
His intervention also shifts the debate from being seen as reactionary anger to being understood as a legitimate defense of cultural and religious sanctity.
Public Reaction: Vandalism or Defense of Sanctity?
The installation of the plaque did not remain a silent act. During Eid-e-Milad-un-Nabi prayers, worshippers protested the emblem. Slogans were shouted, and the plaque was vandalized.
While authorities labeled it vandalism, for many Kashmiris, it was a collective defense of sanctity.
Why?
-
Islamic Principles: Islam prohibits iconography and idol-like representation in sacred places. For many, the emblem resembled a state symbol that disrupted the shrine’s spiritual purity.
-
Emotional Attachment: Hazratbal is tied to centuries of memory and devotion. Any intrusion feels personal and painful.
-
Symbolic Resistance: Breaking the plaque was not just physical—it was symbolic defiance against perceived state intrusion into faith.
Political Fallout: A Battle of Narratives
The incident quickly escalated into a political flashpoint, drawing sharp reactions from leaders across the spectrum.
Mehbooba Mufti: “Blasphemy, Not Vandalism”
PDP chief Mehbooba Mufti called the installation itself a “blasphemous act”, demanding legal accountability not for the protestors, but for those who approved the plaque.
She invoked Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code (deliberate acts intended to outrage religious feelings), arguing that the real crime was the insensitive decision-making, not the anger of the faithful.
BJP & Darakhshan Andrabi: “A Terrorist Attack”
On the other side, BJP leaders and Waqf Chairperson Darakhshan Andrabi labeled the vandalism as a “terrorist attack”. Andrabi demanded that protestors be booked under the Public Safety Act (PSA), a draconian law in Kashmir that allows detention without trial.
Her remarks only added fuel to the fire. Many saw this as weaponizing law against faith, criminalizing emotion instead of introspecting on the misstep.
Grand Mufti’s Stand: A “Needlessly Provocative Act”
The Grand Mufti of Jammu & Kashmir, Mufti Nasir-ul-Islam, provided perhaps the most balanced yet firm reaction.
-
He called the installation a “needlessly provocative act”, insensitive to religious and emotional sentiments.
-
He clarified that protestors were not against the emblem itself, but against those who failed to anticipate the obvious backlash.
-
He warned against media portrayals painting worshippers as extremists, reminding that these same people have stood united in times of tragedy, such as the Pahalgam violence.
His words reframed the issue: the problem was not vandalism, but misjudgment at the top.
Legal Escalation: FIR and BNS Charges
In the aftermath, Srinagar Police registered FIR No. 76/2025 at Nigeen Police Station.
🔎 Sections Invoked under BNS:
-
Section 300 – Disturbing a lawful religious assembly
-
Section 352 – Intentional insult to provoke breach of peace
-
Section 191(2) – Rioting
-
Section 324 – Causing wrongful loss or damage
-
Section 61(4) – Criminal conspiracy
Video footage of the incident was collected. Worshippers accused of damaging the plaque could now face criminal trial.
But this legal escalation raised critical questions:
-
Why punish protest but not the cause of protest?
-
Why ignore accountability of decision-makers who approved the emblem?
The law, in this case, seemed to target consequence, not cause.
The Deeper Crisis: Faith vs Governance in Kashmir
This controversy reveals more than a mistake—it reveals a pattern:
-
Sacred Spaces Politicized
Shrines are being turned into spaces for plaques, emblems, and credit-taking. -
Religious Sensitivities Ignored
Decisions are made without consultation with clerics, scholars, or local communities. -
Law Used as Weapon
The PSA and FIRs are threatened against worshippers instead of addressing governance failures. -
Disconnect Between Leaders and People
Instead of listening, the administration often imposes—widening the trust deficit.
Comparative Perspective: Sacred Spaces and State Intrusion
Across the world, sacred spaces have clashed with state symbols:
-
In Turkey, the Hagia Sophia’s reconversion to a mosque sparked debates over state control vs religious sanctity.
-
In France, the banning of religious symbols in public schools continues to raise tensions over secularism vs faith expression.
-
In India, the Gyanvapi and Ayodhya disputes show how religion and politics intertwine in fragile ways.
Hazratbal now joins this global conversation—about how states must tread carefully around spaces that hold collective memory and identity.
What Needs to Change
-
Keep Sacred Spaces Sacred
Renovations must be guided by humility, not ego. No plaques, no emblems, no branding. -
Consultation Before Action
Religious leaders and community representatives must be consulted in decisions involving shrines. -
No PSA Against Faithful
Protest born of sentiment is not terrorism. Laws like PSA should not be weaponized against communities. -
Accountability at the Top
Decision-makers who approve such acts must be held accountable. Responsibility cannot be shifted onto worshippers alone.
Bottomline: Hazratbal’s Lesson
The Hazratbal Shrine controversy is not just about a plaque—it is about ego colliding with faith.
The plaque may be gone, but its imprint remains—a reminder that symbols can heal or hurt, depending on how they are used.
For Kashmir, a land already scarred by history, the lesson is clear: faith must be respected, not politicized; governance must be humble, not ego-driven.
Hazratbal is not a billboard for authority. It is a sanctuary of devotion. To preserve its sanctity is not just a religious duty—it is a moral and political imperative.
