This report examines the ideological foundations of Hindutva and its practical application through recent judicial rulings and extrajudicial actions concerning religious sites in India.

本報告檢視了印度教民族主義的意識形態基礎，以及透過近期關於印度宗教地點的司法裁決與法外行動的實際應用。

The conceptual framework of Hindutva, formulated by Vinayak Savarkar in 1923, posits a national identity predicated upon a specific interpretation of Hindu cultural and territorial belonging. This ideology diverges from Hinduism as a spiritual practice, functioning instead as a majoritarian political project. The institutionalization of this vision was facilitated by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), established in 1925, and subsequently the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The ascent of the BJP to national governance since 2014 has coincided with the implementation of policies such as the abrogation of Article 370 and the enactment of the Citizenship Amendment Act, which critics argue diminish pluralism.

由 Vinayak Savarkar 於 1923 年制定的印度教民族主義概念框架，主張國家認同應基於對印度教文化與領土歸屬感的特定解釋。此意識形態與作為靈性修行之印度教有所不同，而是作為一個多數派的政治計畫。此願景的制度化是由 1925 年成立的國民志願服務團（RSS）以及隨後的印度人民黨（BJP）所推動。自 2014 年 BJP 執政以來，一系列政策相繼實施，例如廢除第 370 條以及頒布《公民權法修正案》，批評者認為這些做法削弱了多元主義。

These ideological imperatives are currently manifesting in the judicial reclassification of contested religious sites. In the case of the Bhojshala complex in Dhar, the Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled on May 15, 2026, that the site was originally a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati. This determination was supported by an Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) report, which identified 94 sculptures and architectural elements from the Paramara period. Consequently, the court quashed a 2003 order permitting Friday prayers by Muslims at the site, suggesting instead the allocation of alternative land for a mosque. This ruling has since been challenged in the Supreme Court by the mosque's caretaker.

這些意識形態要求目前體現於對爭議宗教地點的司法重新分類。在達爾（Dhar）的 Bhojshala 建築群案例中，中央邦高等法院於 2026 年 5 月 15 日裁定，該地點原為一座供奉薩拉斯瓦蒂女神（Goddess Saraswati）的寺廟。此判定由印度考古調查局（ASI）的報告支持，該報告鑑定出 94 件帕拉馬拉（Paramara）時期的雕塑與建築元件。因此，法院廢止了 2003 年允許穆斯林在該地週五祈禱的命令，並建議為清真寺分配替代土地。此裁決隨後被清真寺管理人在最高法院提出挑戰。

Parallel to judicial processes, there is evidence of extrajudicial enforcement of these ideological tenets. In outer Delhi, BJP MLA Karnail Singh led a group in the demolition of boundary walls on disputed land, alleging the illegal construction of a madrasa. Although the Delhi Police and the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) confirmed the land was disputed and that no functional madrasa existed, the demolition proceeded. Such actions align with a broader pattern of activity by groups like the Bajrang Dal, which have been linked to violence and intimidation against minority populations.

與司法程序平行，有證據顯示存在法外執行這些意識形態準則的情況。在德里郊區，BJP 議員 Karnail Singh 領導一群人拆除爭議土地上的圍牆，指稱該處非法興建伊斯蘭學校（madrasa）。儘管德里警方與德里發展局（DDA）確認該土地屬爭議性質且並不存在運作中的伊斯蘭學校，拆除行動仍繼續進行。此類行動與 Bajrang Dal 等團體的廣泛活動模式一致，這些團體被認為與針對少數族群的暴力與恐嚇行為有關。

The current environment is characterized by a systemic shift toward the institutionalization of Hindu nationalism, evidenced by both high-court mandates and localized vigilante actions.

目前的環境特徵在於系統性地轉向將印度教民族主義制度化，這可從高等法院的指令以及局部地區的私刑行動中得到證實。