Our judiciary is literally strange, as sometimes they make hilarious yet biased observations and judgments. In one such observation, the Madras high court said that “God is omnipresent. God does not need a specific place for his divine presence. It is the fanatic who is the root cause of all problems to divide people in the name of religion”.
Madras high court refused to stall the removal of a temple standing on public land. The court observed that “the petitioner, in the garb of setting up a temple, cannot usurp highway property, which is meant for public use irrespective of creed, caste, and religion”.
“If the petitioner is so particular in facilitating devotees to worship Vinayagar, it is open for him either to allot his unencumbered land or the land, if any, available to the temple and thereafter shift the idol to that place,” the judges said.
The court passed the order on a plea moved by S Periyasamy seeking to quash a notice issued by the state highways department for the removal of a temple in Veppanthattai, in Tamil Nadu’s Perambalur district.
The petitioner, a trustee of the temple, said the mandir had existed for more than three decades and was constructed without causing any obstruction to the free flow of the public and transport.
Refusing to accept the same, the court said, “Even though the petitioner has stated that the temple was constructed three decades ago and the land belonged to the temple, what prevented him from producing necessary documents to establish his case?”
Why no such observations against Mosques, Churches, and Mazar?
Well, we cant raise doubt on the wisdom of our esteemed Milords, as they are learned and more educated than the masses. However, their utter biased is reflected in their acts. We have thousands of Mazar, Church, and Mosques occupied public land, but the judiciary always keeps their eyes closed, maybe to protect the secularism and liberal thread of our society.
The court said “God is omnipresent”, well that is correct as well. However, doesn’t this logic applies to other religions? Or is demolishing Hindu sensitivities is the basic criteria to preserve secularism in India?
This needs to be answered by the establishment and judiciary.
