Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Thursday, October 31, 2024

Constitution Guarantees Right To Live Without Any Religion, Non-Religious Persons Can’t Be Sidelined: Kerala HC Judge Hon’ble Mr Justice VG Arun

Posted in: Civil Laws
Thu, Sep 29, 22, 10:57, 2 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 5481
To live without adhering to any religion in our democratic secular country is certainly in tune with our Constitutional principles. Moreover, it cannot be denied that religion only teaches us discrimination ingraining in our mind

It is most rejoicing to read that none other than Hon’ble Mr Justice VG Arun of the Kerala High Court as recently as on September 24, 2022 while inaugurating and addressing the great event titled Kerala Yukthivadi Sangham and the Kerala Misra Vivaha Vedi as part of ‘SECULAR 2022’ mega event. Hon’ble Mr Justice VG Arun said most commendably, cogently and convincingly that:
To live without adhering to any religion in our democratic secular country is certainly in tune with our Constitutional principles. Moreover, it cannot be denied that religion only teaches us discrimination ingraining in our mind that:
We are Hindus and they are Muslims and so on as we see in Ayodhya where we saw how due to the temple and mosque controversy thousands and thousands of people lost their invaluable lives due to riots, bomb blasts and what not in name of Lord Ram and General of Babur whose name I don’t remember in whose name Babri mosque was built and who legend goes had destroyed Lord Ram temple and then built a mosque over it.

We all know that Lord Ram had given a boon to Lord Hanuman who considered himself his servant that those who worship you will be most dear to me. This alone explains why inspite of so much of rioting and fighting over Lord Ram we rarely see a temple dedicated to him and instead India is flooded with temples of Lord Hanuman. I saw one such temple named Raghunath temple in Jammu. I cried in joy as Hindus are deadly against placing idol of Lord Ram in most of the temples and believe firmly in worshipping his servant named Lord Hanuman and it was for first time in my life in 1991 that I saw idol of Lord Ram.

Till 1989, I considered Lord Hanuman as only a monkey and when my mother used to do pooja in my childhood days prior to 1989, my cousin brother Suresh Sirohi whose house name is Pappu used to start laughing and after him, I also used to start laughing then my cousin brother Naresh, cousin sisters Manju and Kamal and so also my real brother Rajeev whose home name is Raju used to start laughing and then after pooja used to be over we used to all get beaten. Then we all would fight that who laughed first and when it came out that Pappu had laughed first then all my brother, cousin brother and cousin sisters used to get angry on him and he used to never disclose the reason but to me he disclosed as I was closest to him and he then said that:
See we worship a Bandar (Monkey) as God and a Rakshasni (lady demon) named Kali who kills men and then beheads them, drink their blood and wears garland of skulls. I then took it as truth but my best friend of school times named Rahul Sharma educated me in about June or July 1989 that Lord Hanuman is incarnation of Lord Shiv and Kali is not Rakshasni but a Devi who is anger form of Ma Gauri who kills demon and explained the Raktabija boon that he had got of thousands springing up from blood that fell on ground due to which Goddess Kali devoured him. Rahul said that my Mother worships Goddess Kali and treats her like ‘Mother’ more than ‘Devi’! It was only then that I too started treating Goddess Kali whom I considered a Rakshasni till then as my own mother and got emotionally very attached with her which continues till date.

Isn’t it strange that we fight maximum over Lord Ram, Lord Krishan and Lord Shiv in case of Hindus and Muslim Generals and Mughal Kings like Aurangzeb in case of Muslims? Lord Ram had left his own wife in forest to keep his people happy which alone explains why most eminent lawyer – late Ram Jethmalani openly termed Lord Ram as A good king but bad husband! I myself will prefer to die than fight with Muslims over any religious site as I believe fully that Hindus and Muslims can worship together at same place and same time like I and my best friend Sageer Khan used to pray from 1993 to 1995 and God favours sacrifice and not fighting like dogs over a sacred site which I learnt best from Sageer Khan who strongly believed that not a single mosque should be built in Ayodhya, Kashi and Mathura!

Why is it that BJP which fought most strongly over Lord Ram temple and who fought a long legal battle also is most happy by spending crores and crores of rupees on Ram temple in Ayodhya, renaming it from Faizabad to Ayodhya but is dead determined never to allow even a Single High Court Bench in any nook and corner of Uttar Pradesh where maximum holy cities are located not even at Ayodhya as they are all legally worthless? Why PM Narendra Damodardas Modi proudly spends crores of rupees on temple renovation at Varanasi but considers it totally unfit for High Court Bench? Why PM Narendra Damodardas Modi very proudly visits Lord Augharnath temple in Meerut in West UP where lawyers have gone on strike umpteen number of times even for six months but he like his worthy predecessors very strongly feel that for High Court Bench and High Court only the city famous by name of Allah named Allahabad and the city famous by name of Nawab named Lucknow deserve High Court and a Single High Court Bench in whole of UP respectively?

Why is it that Yogi Adityanath thundered for a High Court Bench in Parliament for Gorakhpur way back in 1998 as an MP and even placed a private member Bill in 2015 again as an MP for High Court Bench at Gorakhpur and why inspite of his second term in office he is totally helpless on this front as Centre is dead determined not to allow any High Court Bench anywhere in UP as the world’s greatest jurist and greatest barrister trained most rigorously in UK named fondly as Pandit Nehru was dead against any High Court Bench anywhere else except at Lucknow so near to Allahabad? This also explains why former PM late Atal Bihari Vajpayee thundered in Parliament as Opposition Leader in 1986 for High Court Bench in West UP but did nothing after becoming PM!

Why talk about politicians only? Even all Chief Justices of India from 1947 to 2000 very strongly believed in interest of justice that the people of hilly areas now named Uttarakhand considered Devbhoomi should most stupidly, senselessly and like idiots travel happily thousands of kilometers away all the way to not even Lucknow which is about 200 km before Allahabad but right till Allahabad as this they considered best! A former Supreme Court Judge named Justice Jaswant Singh was appointed Head of Commission to look into where all Benches are needed by former PM late Mrs Indira Gandhi in late 1970s. It recommended High Court Bench at Aurangabad in Maharashtra which was promptly created in 1985 and which already had two High Court Benches at Nagpur and Panaji and which even now tops in justice index list and now fourth Bench also approved by former Maharashtra CM Uddhav Thackeray at Kolhapur for just 6 districts and so also in West Bengal at Jalpaiguri which already had a Bench at Port Blair and in Madurai in Tamil Nadu! The worst part is that Justice Jaswant Singh Commission recommended 3 High Court Benches for undivided UP yet not a single created and lame excuses were forwarded like we see now of getting sanction from the concerned High Court Chief Justice, Chief Minister etc etc!

It must be mentioned here that Justice Jaswant Commission had also recommended a Bench at Raipur in undivided Madhya Pradesh which already had two Benches at Gwalior and Indore which was not implemented but it was compensated generously as Centre later gave High Court itself for that region of Madhya Pradesh now famous by name of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in 2000 and which has just about 2 or 3 crore population!

As if this was not enough, Centre led by PM Dr Manmohan Singh most pompously announced two High Court Benches for Karnataka which has just 6 crore population at Dharwad and Gulbarga for just 4 and 8 districts respectively but for a big state like UP which is most populated more than 25 crore population and maximum pending cases and what not yet no Bench approved even though the President and Secretary of Meerut Bar which is leading the sacred struggle for a High Court Bench in West UP along with senior lawyers of West UP repeatedly kept meeting the then PM Dr Manmohan Singh and former UPA Chairperson Sonia Gandhi and all they got was empty assurances. Former Union Minister RPN Singh then in Congress and now in BJP had disclosed that Kapil Sibal as Law Minister had recommended High Court Bench at Meerut but Centre and the then UP CM Akhilesh Yadav did not thought it worthy to be implemented actually!

When a woman lawyer KL Chitra filed PIL for setting up a High Court Bench in West UP which came up for hearing before the then CJI Ranjan Gogoi who is now Rajya Sabha MP said he sympathized with her pleadings which was fully justified but distanced himself saying that it is for Centre to look into it and dismissed the petition! The lawyers of West UP have gone on strike for 6 months many times as in 2001 and one month strike also many time as in 2009, and so also four to five months as in 2014-15 and one month hunger strike also as in 1978, boycotted Lok Adalats and have been going on regular strike every Saturday since 1981 May till now and many times even on Wednesday which now has been discontinued yet Centre remains dead determined never to allow even a Single High Court Bench in any nook and corner of UP on one pretext or the other!

The 230th report of Law Commission of India headed by Justice Dr AR Lakshmanan in 2009 recommended that High Court Benches must be created in all States but most disgracefully it was implemented only for an unworthy State named Karnataka where there was no need of any Bench but lawless State like Bihar as even BJP Union Ministers term it where there is not even a single High Court Bench and so also Uttar Pradesh termed by former UN Secretary General Ban ki moon while in office as rape and crime capital of India was considered totally unfit for it!

No matter how many people are killed or beheaded in Uttar Pradesh or in Rajasthan but Centre is dead determined that they should not have more than High Court Bench and most lawless State Bihar from where former Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad hails should not have even one Bench! The lawyers of Udaipur where most brutal beheading took place notoriously just recently and adjoining regions have been demanding Bench since long time but again Centre is just not prepared for it!

All told, we really ought not to forget that Hon’ble Mr Justice VG Arun of Kerala High Court expressed his firm belief that gatherings like these could materialize the ideals put forth by Ambedkar, Sree Narayan Guru and Sahodaran Ayyappan in simply viewing men as men and loving each other regardless of religion. Who can dispute or deny this? He further said that he believed that the evergreen lives of VK Pavithran, where humanitarian blood in us, could serve as the motto in the journey of mankind to attain this goal. Absolutely right! It is our politicians and judges who need to remember this most who are remote controlling everything in our nation and yet doing precious little to ensure that brazen violation and merciless trampling of right to speedy trial and justice at doorsteps and right to equality as enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution is discontinued forthwith!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
Present space law framework in the country. Space has heightened the curiosity of mankind for centuries. Due to the advancement in technology, there is fierce competition amongst nations for the next space war.
The scope of Section 151 CPC has been explained by the Supreme Court in the case K.K. Velusamy v. N. Palanisamy
Co-operative Societies are governed by the Central Co-operative Societies Act 1912, where there is no State Act. In West Bengal they were governed by the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act
Registration enables an NGO to be a transparent in its operations to the Government, Donors, to its members and to its urgent community.
The ingredients of Section 18 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 are
Drafting of legal Agreements and Deeds in India
ST Land rules in India,West Bengal
The paper will discuss about the provisions related to liquidated damages. How the law has evolved. Difference between the provisions of England and India.
A privilege may not be a right, but, under the constitution of the country, I do not gather that any broad distinction is drawn between the rights and the privileges that were enjoyed and that were taken away.
It is most hurting to see that in India, the soldiers who hail from Jammu and Kashmir and who join forces either in Army or in CRPF or in BSF or in police or in any other forces against the will of majority
Pukhraj v/s State of Uttarakhand warned high caste priests very strongly against refusing to perform religious ceremonies on behalf of lower caste pilgrims. It took a very stern view of the still existing practice of exclusion of the SC/ST community in Haridwar.
This article aims to define delay in civil suits. It finds the general as well as specific causes leading to pendency of civil suits and over-burdening of courts. This articles suggests some solutions which are pragmatic as well as effective to reduce the burden of the courts and speed up the civil judicial process.
This article deals with importance, needs, highlights and provisions of the Surrogacy Bill 2016, which is passed by the lok sabha on 19th December 2018 .
Cross Examination In Case of Injunction Suits, Injunctions are governed by Sections 37, 38, 39 to Section 42 of Specific Relief Act.
Satishchandra Ratanlal Shah v Gujarat inability of a person to return the loan amount cannot give rise to a criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right at the beginning of the transaction..
Dr.Ashok Khemka V/s Haryana upheld the integrity of eminent IAS officer because of his upright and impeccable credentials has emerged as an eyesore for politicians of all hues but also very rightly expunged Haryana Chief Minister ML Khattar adverse remarks in his Personal Appraisal Report
State of Rajasthan and others v. Mukesh Sharma has upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 8(2)(i) of the Rajasthan Prisons (Shortening of Sentences) Rules, 2006.
Gurmit Singh Bhatia Vs Kiran Kant Robinson the Supreme Court reiterated that, in a suit, the plaintiff is the dominus litis and cannot be forced to add parties against whom he does not want to fight unless there is a compulsion of the rule of law.
explicitly in a latest landmark ruling prohibited the use of loudspeakers in the territory without prior permission from the authorities.
The Commissioner of Police v/s Devender Anand held that filing of criminal complaint for settling a dispute of civil nature is abuse of process of law.
Rajasthan Vs Shiv Dayal High Court cannot dismiss a second appeal merely on the ground that there is a concurrent finding of two Courts (whether of dismissal or decreeing of the suit), and thus such finding becomes unassailable.
Complete Guide to Pleadings in India, get your Written statement and Plaint Drafted by highly qualified lawyers at reasonable rate.
Sushil Chandra Srivastava vs UP imposed absolute prohibition on use of DJs in the state and asked the state government to issue a toll-free number, dedicated to registering complaints against illegal use of loudspeakers. It will help control noise pollution to a very large extent if implemented in totality.
Rajasthan v/s Shri Ramesh Chandra Mundra that institutional independence, financial autonomy is integral to independence of judiciary. directing the Rajasthan Government to reconsider the two decade old proposal of the then Chief Justice of Rajasthan High Court to upgrade 16 posts of its Private Secretaries as Senior Private Secretaries
The Indian Contract act, 1872 necessities significant consideration in a few of its areas. One such area of the Indian Contract act of 1872 is where if any person finds a lost good belonging to others and takes them into his custody acts as the bailee to the owner of the good.
Government has notified 63 provisions of the Motor Vehicles Amendment Act 2019 including the ones dealing with enhanced penalties
Jose Paulo Coutinho vs. Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira no attempt has been made yet to frame a Uniform Civil Code applicable to all citizens of the country despite exhortations by it. Whether succession to the property of a Goan situated outside Goa in India will be governed by the Portuguese Civil Code, 1867
In a major legal setback to Pakistan, the High Court of England and Wales rejecting rightly Pakistan's frivolous claims and ruling explicitly that the VII Nizam of Hyderabad's descendants and India can collect 35 million pounds from Londons National Westminster Bank.
Power of Attorney and the Specific Relief Act, 1963
air pollution in Delhi and even adjoining regions like several districts of West UP are crossing all limits and this year even in districts adjoining Delhi like Meerut where air pollution was never felt so much as is now being felt.
Dr Syed Afzal (Dead) v/sRubina Syed Faizuddin that the Civil Courts while considering the application seeking interim mandatory injunction in long pending cases, should grant opportunity of hearing to the opposite side, interim mandatory injunctions can be granted after granting opportunity of hearing to the opposite side.
students of Banaras Hindu University's (BHU's) Sanskrit Vedvigyan Sankay (SVDVS) went on strike demanding the cancellation of the appointment of Assistant Professor Feroze Khan and transfer him to another faculty.
Odisha Development Corporation Ltd Vs. M/s Anupam Traders & Anr. the time tested maxim actus curiae neminem gravabit which in simple and straight language means that, No party should suffer due to the act of Court.
M/S Daffodills Pharmaceuticals Ltd v/s. State of U.P that no one can be inflicted with an adverse order, without being afforded a minimum opportunity of hearing. In other words, the Apex Court reiterated the supreme importance of the legal maxim and latin phrase titled Audi alteram partem
Ram Murti Yadav v/s State of Uttar Pradesh the standard or yardstick for judging the conduct of the judicial officer has necessarily to be strict, that the public has a right to demand virtually irreproachable conduct from anyone performing a judicial function.
Judicial Officers Being Made Scapegoats And Penalized By Inconvenient Transfers And Otherwise: SC
Desh Raj v/s Balkishan that the mandatory time-line for filing written statement is not applicable to non-commercial suits. In non-commercial suits, the time-line for written statement is directory and not mandatory, the courts have the discretion to condone delay in filing of written statement in non-commercial suits.
M/S Granules India Ltd. Vs UOI State, as a litigant, cannot behave as a private litigant, and it has solemn and constitutional duty to assist the court in dispensation of justice.
To exercise one's own fundamental right to protest peacefully does not give anyone the unfettered right to block road under any circumstances thereby causing maximum inconvenience to others.
Today, you have numerous traffic laws as well as cases of traffic violations. People know about safe driving yet they end up defying the safety guidelines. It could be anything like driving while talking on the phone, hit and run incidents, or driving under the influence of alcohol.
The legal processes are uncertain. Also, there are times when justice gets denied, and the legal outcomes get delayed. Hence, nobody wants to see themselves or their loved one end up in jail.
Arun Kumar Gupta v/s Jharkhand that judicial officer's integrity must be of a higher order and even a single aberration is not permitted. The law pertaining to the vital subject of compulsory retirement of judicial officers have thus been summed up in this noteworthy judgment.
Online Contracts or Digital Agreements are contracts created and signed over the internet. Also known as e-contracts or electronic contracts, these contracts are a more convenient and faster way of creating and signing contracts for individuals, institutions and corporate.
Re: Problems And Miseries Of Migrant Labourers has asked Maharashtra to be more vigilant and make concerted effort in identifying and sending stranded migrant workers to their native places.
Gerald Lynn Bostock v/s Clayton County, Georgia that employees cannot be fired from the jobs merely because of their transgender and homosexual identity.
This article compares two cases with similar facts, yet different outcomes and examines the reasons for the same. It revolves around consideration and validation of contracts.
Odisha Vikas Parishad vs Union Of India while modifying the absolute stay on conducting the Jagannath Rath Yatra at Puri has allowed it observing the strict restrictions and regulations of the Centre and the State Government.
Soni Beniwal v/s Uttarakhand even if there is a bar on certain matters to be taken as PIL, there is always discretion available with the Court to do so in exercise of its inherent powers.
Indian Contract Act was commenced in the year 1872 and since then, several deductions and additions have happened to the same. The following piece of work discusses about the concept of offer under the Indian Contract Act, 1872
Top