A controversy has erupted in Kurla, Mumbai, after videos emerged online showing individuals placing “I Love Muhammad” stickers on vehicles, including bikes and rickshaws, often in the presence of police but without the owners’ consent.
This incident, which sparked last week and quickly spread on social media, has led to widespread public debate on religious expression, civic rights, and law enforcement’s responsibilities. So far, no official police action has been reported, with both political and religious organisations reacting strongly and planning counter-campaigns to assert their views.
The incident has become a flashpoint for broader questions about coexistence and freedom in public spaces.
Outrage on the Streets: How the Incident Unfolded
The now-viral videos depict groups of men stopping vehicles along LBS Road, Kurla, and attaching “I Love Muhammad” stickers even as vehicle owners protested. In several recordings, police officials can be seen at the scene; however, none are observed intervening or stopping the campaigners.
While some defenders argue the stickers represent benign religious pride, the process was clearly without the consent of those affected, raising concerns about individual rights and public order. Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Kirit Somaiya publicly demanded strict action, tagging Maharashtra authorities and emphasising the need for law enforcement to respond decisively.
Counter Campaigns & Escalating Tensions
Almost immediately, Hindu organisations such as Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal announced drive-ins and meetings-one notably at Aarey Milk Colony-under counter-banners like “I Love Mahadev.” These moves are intended to assert their own religious identity and express concern over what they perceive as intimidation by the original campaign.
Leaders from Hindu groups have both condemned the “I Love Muhammad” campaign as provocative and called for peace, while warning that such acts, if left unchecked, could spiral into larger unrest. Simultaneously, Muslim bodies, including Raza Academy, insist that legitimate religious expression is being unfairly stigmatised and policed; they wrote to the President of India seeking protection of their constitutional rights and an impartial probe into police actions elsewhere.
The entire incident resonates with earlier incidents in Kanpur and Ahilyanagar, where similar banners and protests resulted in police intervention, allegations of political bias, and widespread debate over freedom of expression.
Legal, Social & Official Perspectives
The debate quickly extended beyond Kurla, drawing in legal and constitutional arguments. Critics of the sticker drive highlight its potential violation of property and personal rights, questioning how the Motor Vehicles Act applies when vehicles are used as unwilling platforms for religious messaging.
Others warn that law enforcement’s passive stance could embolden further confrontational campaigns in the future. Raza Academy’s letter to President Droupadi Murmu argues that selective enforcement undermines democracy, alienates minority communities, and weakens India’s pluralistic values.
In contrast, local officials in Ahilyanagar have reassured the public that order is being maintained and that actions will be taken against any deliberate disruptions, echoing calls for peace and restraint from both sides.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
Kurla’s sticker controversy is another stark reminder of the delicate balance Mumbai and all of India must maintain between freedom of expression and mutual respect. Public spaces must not become arenas for forced or confrontational advocacy, regardless of the message or its intent.
The Logical Indian urges every community member and public official to champion dialogue, reason, and empathy. Genuine religious pride must never come at the cost of another’s agency or peace.
