In UP, an overreach in the name of faith

The State’s involvement is not only wholly extraneous but also complicates matters for the larger social fabric.

Uttar Pradesh’s directive to eateries along the Kanwar Yatra — a pilgrimage undertaken by Lord Shiva devotees — route to display the names of proprietors exemplifies unnecessary State intervention. The state police had originally issued the directive, saying this would avoid “confusion” among the faithful.

Muzaffarnagar: Kanwariyas walk past the shops on which banners with shopkeepers' name were put up on Kanwar Marg after an order issued by Uttar Pradesh Government, in Muzaffarnagar, Saturday, July 20, 2024. (PTI Photo) (PTI07_20_2024_000145A)(PTI)

It had to make compliance voluntary after opposition parties and even allies of the ruling party in the state criticised it as communal dog-whistling. Soon after, the chief minister’s office made it mandatory. Copycat moves by the Uttarakhand government and the Ujjain local government will only push normalisation of such divisive moves in the name of faith.

Policing small businesses in the name of faith is not just discriminatory but also undermines people’s confidence in the State. The UP government has been over-enthusiastic in projecting itself as a champion of the faith of the majority. A few years ago, it banned the sale of meat and non-vegetarian food along the Kanwar routes, citing religious sentiments of the pilgrims. But the fallout of such bans for small businesses can’t be ignored. Given meat and related businesses see a preponderance of certain communities, this becomes discriminatory by action, if not intent. The latest intervention will not only deepen divides along religious lines, but also caste lines given that many related prejudices continue to prevail. This is not to argue against religious sensitivities of the pilgrims. But the fact is Kanwar Yatras have been happening for decades without needing such diktats.

Over the years, eateries and other businesses and the pilgrims, and by extension, different communities, would have worked out arrangements that take into account matters of faith. The State’s involvement is not only wholly extraneous but also complicates matters for the larger social fabric.