Legal Interpretations from Ayodhya Verdict Part 2



Jay Shree Ram!

These are some notes from Ayodhya Verdict regarding legal interpretations of certain statutory provisions:

Read Part 1

The Union Minister of Home Affairs indicated that the law which sought to prohibit the forcible conversion of places of worship was not “to create new disputes and to rake up old controversies which had long been forgotten by the people…but facilitate the object sought to be achieved”

The Places of Worship Act which was enacted in 1991 by Parliament protects and secures the fundamental values of the Constitution. The Preamble underlines the need to protect the liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship. It emphasises human dignity and fraternity. Tolerance, respect for and acceptance of the equality of all religious faiths is a fundamental precept of fraternity. This was specifically adverted to by the Union Minister of Home Affairs in the course of his address before the Rajya Sabha on 12 September 1991.

In providing a guarantee for the preservation of the religious character of places of public worship as they existed on 15 August 1947 and against the conversion of places of public worship, Parliament determined that independence from colonial rule furnishes a constitutional basis for healing the injustices of the past by providing the confidence to every religious community that their places of worship will be preserved and that their character will not be altered.

Those norms implement the Fundamental Duties under Article 51A and are hence positive mandates to every citizen as well. The State, has by enacting the law, enforced a constitutional commitment and operationalized its constitutional obligations to uphold the equality of all religions and secularism which is a part of the basic features of the Constitution. The Places of Worship Act imposes a non-derogable obligation towards enforcing our commitment to secularism under the Indian Constitution. The law is hence a legislative instrument designed to protect the secular features of the Indian polity, which is one of the basic features of the Constitution. Non-retrogression is a foundational feature of the fundamental constitutional principles of which secularism is a core component. The Places of Worship Act is thus a legislative intervention which preserves non-retrogression as an essential feature of our secular values.

============================

Read more on Telegram Channel

Read more in Hindi

Read more Internet Archive

===========================



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Legal interpretations from Ayodhya Verdict Part 8

Image
  =================== Jay Shree Ram! These are some notes from Ayodhya Verdict regarding legal interpretations of certain statutory provisions: Read more Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 Part 5 Part 6 Part 7 Principle as to personality of institutions.- Apart from natural persons and corporations, which are recognised by English law, the position under Hindu law is that if an endowments is made for a religious or charitable institution, without the instrumentality of a trust, and the object of the endowment is one which is recognised as pious, being either religious or charitable under the accepted notions of Hindu law, the institution will be treated as a juristic person capable of holding property. – Justice B K Mukhergea Upon making an endowment, the donor relinquishes all claims to the endowed property. The property now vests in the pious purpose at the heart of the endowment which is recognised as a legal person. The idol forms the material manifestation of th...
Read more

Forfeiture of Citizenship in USA

  UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Vs M/s. GANPATI DEALCOM PVT. LTD. Forfeiture of Citizenship in USA: The aforesaid proposition has also been confirmed by the House of Lords in R v. H, [2003] 1 ALL ER 497. 17.19 In Kennedy v Mendoza¬Martinez, 372 US 144 (1963), the Supreme Court of the United States, while concerned with the constitutionality of legislation that imposed forfeiture of citizenship on those who had left or remained outside the United States during wartime to evade military service, had laid down the following relevant factors to classify forfeiture law: (a) Whether the sanction involves an affirmative disability or restraint; (b) Whether it has been historically regarded as a punishment; (c) Whether it is only applicable where there has been a finding of scienter (that is, a finding that an act has been done knowingly and intentionally); (d) Whether its operation promotes the traditional retributive and deterrent aims of punishment; (e) Whether the behaviour t...
Read more

Legal Interpretation from Ayodhya Verdict Part 9

Image
  =================== Jay Shree Ram! These are some notes from Ayodhya Verdict regarding legal interpretations of certain statutory provisions: Read more Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 Part 5 Part 6 Part 7 Part 8 Where there exists an express deed of dedication, the legal personality vests in the pious purpose of the founder. The idol is the material embodiment of the pious purpose and is the site of jural relations. There are instances of the submergence or even destruction of the idol inspite of which it has been held that the legal personality continues to subsist. Even if a testator were to make a dedication to a religious purpose but the idol did not exist at the time the dedication was made or the manifestation of the divine was not in the form of the idol, but in the form of some other object of religious significance, the legal personality would continue to vest in the pious purpose of the dedication itself. A Swayambhu deity is a manifestation of God tha...
Read more