Gandhinagar (AsiaNews) – Do individuals or organisations linked to political or religious movements have the right to intimidate or punish other people outside the law?
This question was sparked by an incident in the newsroom of a Gujarat television station, where a leader of the Bajrang Dal (BD), a Hindu nationalist organisation, handed trishuls (sacred tridents associated with the deity Shiva) to two female journalists during a live broadcast, using them to simulate the act of slitting a person's throat.
The incident took place at Pradesh 24 Gujarati, a news channel. The nationalist leader involved is Jwalit Mehta, the BD’s vice-president for Gujarat.
According to Newslaundry, the news channel reported that the tridents were presented as a "symbolic gesture of support" after one of its young anchors, Piya Gadhvi, allegedly received threats from followers of Sant Rampal, a controversial guru, and convicted murderer.
These threats have not been verified by independent sources.
Yet, the case raises a broader issue regarding normalising religious and political mobilisation in spheres that ought to be governed by professional and constitutional standards.
A trishul is a Hindu religious symbol, and its possession or display does not, in itself, constitute a human rights violation.
Concern arises from the context in which such symbols are used, specifically when religious mobilisation is accompanied by imagery suggesting violence and threats.
The channel rejected interpretations suggesting the gesture was directed at Muslims or Christians, stating instead that it was aimed exclusively at the followers of Sant Rampal.
Nonetheless, the images are raising concerns because the trishul diksha, an initiation ceremony involving the distribution of tridents, has a long history within the mobilisation efforts of organisations such as the BD and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP).
Newslaundry notes that such efforts gained particular prominence during the era of the Ayodhya movement and the inter-communal violence of the early 1990s.
The situation in Gujarat, India’s westernmost state, must be understood in light of the state’s long history of religious mobilisation. The Bajrang Dal and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad are prominent organisations in campaigns promoting Hindu nationalism, centred on Hindu identity, religious conversion, and the activities of Christian communities.
In August 2026, a public book-reading event in Ahmedabad was reportedly disrupted by members of the BD and the VHP.
Participants were allegedly threatened, and during the standoff, copies of I Am Malala, the autobiography of Nobel laureate Malala Yousafzai, and The Diary of Anne Frank, written by the young Jewish writer who became a symbol of the Holocaust, were reportedly torn up.
The crucial question, therefore, is not whether the trishul is inherently a Hindu religious symbol, it clearly is. Instead, one must ask what happens when this symbol, associated with organised religious mobilisation, is placed in the hands of female journalists, accompanied by an overtly aggressive act.
The broadcaster maintains that the symbolism was protective rather than threatening in nature. This explanation should be acknowledged. However, the image itself warrants close analysis, particularly in a country where religious minorities have faced, and still face, threats stemming from accusations regarding religious conversion.
