The Supreme Court will consider reviewing the case of definition of “Hindutva” | India News
A bank headed by the President of the Supreme Court SA Bobde said he would listen to the petition after completing the arguments in the case of faith versus fundamental rights that arise from the pleas that seek the revision of the SC ruling that annuls the religious custom that prohibits the religious custom that prohibits the entry of women in the age of 10-50 years. group in the temple of Sabarimala Ayyappa in Kerala.
CJI Bobde said that the bank of nine judges headed by him, and that he understands judges R Banumathi, Ashok Bhushan, L Nageswara Rao, Mohan M Shantanagoudar, S Abdul Nazeer, R Subhash Reddy, BR Gavai and Surya Kant, will resume the case from Sabarimala on a daily basis from March 16. The hearing was derailed because one of the judges was sick with swine flu.
In the case related to Abhiram Singh, pending since 1992, lead attorney Arvind Datar said that several candidates had been acquitted in the case of electoral negligence related to the Maharashtra assembly polls of 1990. “But my client, Abhiram Singh, is caught in the case, since the petition was sent to a bank of three judges, then to a bank of five judges and finally to a bank of seven judges who decided to expand the scope and scope of disqualification of a candidate to seek votes appealing to religion, race, caste, community or own language, its rival candidates or voters, “he said.
When Datar requested an early hearing on Abhiram Singh’s request, CJI Bobde said the opposite side wanted the court to revise the definition of “Hindutva.” “Your prayer is to make up for the” Hindutva “trial. It will take time, as long discussions are expected on the subject. We will try to hear this request after completing the hearing in the Sabarimala case,” he said.
On December 11, 1995, in the Ramesh Yeshwant Prabhoo, SC case, it ruled that simply using the words ‘Hindutva’ or ‘Hinduism’ in an electoral speech would not attract the rigor of disqualification under Section 123 (3) of the Representation of the Law of the people. “The simple use of the word ‘Hindutva’ or ‘Hinduism’ or the mention of any other religion in an electoral speech does not include it within the network of subsection (3) and / or subsection (3A) of Section 123, unless the additional elements indicated are also present in that speech, ”said the SC.
“A precise meaning cannot be attributed to the terms ‘Hindu’, ‘Hindutva’ and ‘Hinduism’, and no meaning in the abstract can limit it only to the narrow limits of religion, excluding the content of the culture and heritage of the India. It also indicates that the term “Hindutva” is more related to the way of life of people in the subcontinent, “the court said.
The court had said: “It is difficult to appreciate how, in view of these decisions, the term ‘Hindutva’ or ‘Hinduism’ per se, in the abstract, can be assumed and meant with a narrow Hindu fundamentalist religious fanaticism, or interpreted within the prohibition in subsections (3) and / or (3A) of Section 123, ”he had said.