“Navratri is one of the most important and sacred festivals in the Hindu faith, commemorating the victory of the goddess Durga over the buffalo-headed demon Mahishasura and the triumph of good over evil. Often seen as a celebration of feminine energy, it is a time for friends and family to come together and honour century-old traditions with prayers, joyous performances, special meals, and fireworks,” official press statement released by the Canadian PM said.

Terming the festival as a chance to grab knowledge about the culture of Hindu communities and an occasion to recognise their contributions to Canada, he said as per the statement, “For all Canadians, Navratri also offers an opportunity to learn more about the rich history and culture of Hindu communities and to recognize their invaluable contributions to Canada’s social, cultural, and economic fabric. Today’s celebrations remind us that diversity is one of Canada’s greatest strengths. On behalf of my family and the Government of Canada, I extend my best wishes to everyone celebrating Navratri this year.”

This comes after the Canadian PM had told his country’s parliament that his government had reasons to believe that Indian agents were involved in the killing of the Khalistani terrorist Hardeep Singh Nijjar. India rejected the claims calling them ‘absurd’ and ‘motivated’.

“We have seen and reject the statement of the Canadian Prime Minister in their Parliament, as also the statement by their Foreign Minister. Allegations of Government of India’s involvement in any act of violence in Canada are absurd and motivated…We are a democratic polity with a strong commitment to rule of law,” the Ministry of External Affairs said in a statement.

Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a designated terrorist in India, was killed outside a Gurdwara in Canada’s Surrey on June 18.

On the issue, External affairs minister S Jaishankar said the Canadian attitude towards terrorists, extremist people who openly advocate violence is “very permissive”.

“The Canadian PM made some allegations initially privately, and then publicly. And our response to him, both in private and public — what he was alleging was not consistent with our policy. And that if he had, if his government had anything relevant and specific they would like us to look into, we were open to looking at it. Now, that’s where that conversation is at this point of time,” S Jaishankar said.