Gita Prachar-Prasar Samittee Allahabad challenges SC 5-Judge Bench description of Hindutva as a way of life

Sr. Advocate Prof.Bhim Singh yesterday filed written arguments before the Supreme Court on behalf of Sri Vibhandak Rishi Ashram Vikas Evam Srimad Bhagwad Gita Prachar-Prasar Samittee, Allahabad seeking withdrawal of observation made by a 5-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice Mr. P.B. Gajendragadkar in Sastri Yagnapusushadji and Ors. Vs. Muldas Bhudardas Vaishya and Another’s Appeal the Constitution Bench comprising of Hon’ble Justice K.N. Wanchoo, Justice M.Hidayatullah, Justice V. Ramaswami & Justice P. Satyanarayana Raju had observed in their judgment dated 14.01.1966 (para 29) that,

“It does not worship any one God; it does not subscribe to any one dogma; it does not believe in any one philosophic concept; it does not follow to any one set of religious rights of performances; it does not appear to satisfy the narrow traditional features of any religion or creed. It may broadly be described as a way of life and nothing more.” 

Prof.Bhim in his written submission submitted,

“That the Hon’ble 7-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court may be pleased to reconsider this definition of Hindutva in the light of the message transcended Srimad Bhagvad Gita. According to Sri Krishn (B.G.-2.16-29), the unreal never exists and the real is never without existence at any time. God alone is real permanent, indestructible, changeless and eternal, but heis beyond thought, imperceptible and quite above the fluttering of mind. Action is the name of the mode by which a man attains to God after subduing his mind. Putting this mode into practice is dharma, which is a trust or obligation. As Sri Krishn has told Arjun in the fortieth verse of Chapter 2 (Bhagvad Gita). “Since selfless action neither wears out the seed from which it sprang nor has any adverse consequence, even a partial observance of it liberates one from the dire terror of repeated birth and death.” So the undertaking of this action is Dharma.” 

 The 7-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice Mr. T.S. Thakur had allowed Prof.Bhim Singh to submit written arguments in the intervention petition which has been filed on behalf of Sri Vibhandak Rishi Ashram Vikas Evam Srimad Bhagwad Gita Prachar-Prasar Samittee, Allahabad. Prof.Bhim Singh filed written arguments before the Constitution Bench this morning praying that the words, “Hindu Religion may broadly bedescribed as a way of the life and nothing more” may be expunged/deleted from the pages of the judgment of the 5-judge bench which was delivered on 14.01.1966.

Sd/-Ajay Kumar Singh, Advocate-on-Record   

————————————————————————————————————————————

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
I.A. (CIVIL) NO. 6   OF 2016

IN

CIVIL APPEAL NO.8339 OF 1995

 

IN THE MATTER OF:

Narayan Singh                                                                      …Petitioner

 

Versus

Sunderlal Patwa                                                                    …Respondent

 

AND IN THE MATTER OF:

Sri Vibhandak Rishi Ashram Vikas Evam 

Shreemad Bhagwad Gita Prachar —Prasar

Samiti  & Anr.                                                               …Applicant/Intervenor

 

A BRIEF WRITTEN SUBMISSION ON BEHALF

OF INTERVENOR

 

1.      That the intervenors would like to submit that they are the interested and necessary party in the present case as the judgment delivered by 5-Judge Bench headed by the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India Mr. P.B. Gajendragadkar dated 14.01.1966 has interpreted, though casually, that the Hindu religion, “may broadly be described as a way of life and nothing more”.

a).     The Hon’ble Constitution Bench was dealing with a matter pertaining to a local dispute over the entry of certain classes of Hindu religion into the temple.

2.      That the Constitution Bench of 5-Judges headed by Chief Justice of India, Mr. P.B. Gajendragadkar came out with a new interpretation of Hindutva/Hinduism for the first time. In para 29 of the judgment in Civil Appeal No.517 of 1964 dated 14.01.1966 titled as Sastri Yagnapurushadji and Others Vs. Muldas Bhudardas Vaishya and Another reported as (1966) 3 SCR 242 : AIR 1966 SC 1119 came out with an interpretation of Hindutva without considering the past record and the logic carried out in the Vedas, Scriptures as well as Shrimad Bhagvad Gita. The Constitution Bench said (para 28), “the Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, Vol. VI, has described ‘Hinduism’ as the title applied to that form of religion which prevails among the vast majority of the present population of the Indian Empire (P.686). As Dr. Radhakrishnan has observed that; “The Hindu civilization is so called, since its original founders or earliest followers occupied the territory drained by the Sindhu (the Indus) river system corresponding to the North West Frontier Province and the Punjab. This is recorded in the Rigu Veda, the oldestof the Vedas, the Hindu scriptures which give their name to this period Indian history. The people on the Indian side of the Sindhu were called Hindu by the Persian history. The people on the Indian side of the Sindhu were called Hindu by the Persian and the later western invaders. That is the genesis of the word ‘Hindu’.”       

3.      That the Constitution Bench though described Hinduism broadly but confined its scope that it was nothing more than a way of life.

4.      That a 3-Judge Bench of Supreme Court of India headed by Justice Mr. J.S. Verma in Civil Appeal No.2835 & 2836 of 1989 in its judgment decided on 11.12.1995 titled as Dr. Ramesh Yeshwant Prabhoo Vs. Prabhakar Kashinath Kunte & Ors reported as (1996) 1 SCC. The Supreme Court (para 35) referred Sastri Yagnapurushadji and Others Vs. Muldas Bhudardas Vaishya and Another and said, “Who are Hindus and what are the broad features of Hindu religion, that must be the first part of our enquiry in dealing with the present controversy between the parties. The historical and etymological genesis of the word ‘Hindu’ has given rise to a controversy amongst indologists; but the view generally accepted by scholars appears to be that the word ‘Hindu’ is derived from the River Sindhu otherwise known as Indus which flows from the Punjab. ‘That part of the great Aryan race’, says Monier Williams, ‘which immigrated from Central Asia, through the mountain passes into India, settled first in the distircts near the River Sindhu (now called the Indus). The Persians pronounced this word Hindu and named their Aryan brethren Hindus. The Greeks, who probably gained their first ideas of India from the Persians, dropped the hard aspirate, and called the Hindu ‘Indoi’ (‘Hinduism’ by Monier Williams, p.1).”

5.      That Hindu Dharma has passed through several stages/ situations/tense periods in the history of humanity for thousands of years yet it remained a flowering ethos with Ocean of humanity transcending message of humanism and peace to the entire mankind. Hinduism could not be described as a way of life and nothing more. This is a casual interpretation and could not be interpretted as Hindutva described in the Vedas or the Holy Granth of the Hindus, ‘Srimad Bhagvad Gita’. Introducing any change in the concept of the oldest Dharma in the world cannot be appreciated nor it can be accepted by any legal means or methods.  

6.      That the judiciary has competence and authority to interpret the laws made by man. In other words the laws enacted by the legislature or traditional laws could be interpreted by the judiciary but the laws made by God cannot be interpreted by the judicary nor the courts are empowered to interpret the laws made by God. Hinduism is the oldest religion in the world and it has one God alone. The Supreme Court in its judgment in case of Sastri Yagnapurushadji and Others Vs. Muldas Bhudardas Vaishya and Another, the Hon’ble 5-Judge Bench has erred by saying that, “It does not worship any one God; it does not subsribe to any one dogma, it does not believe in any one philosophic concept; it does not follow to any one set of religious rights of performances; it does not appear to satisfy the narrow traditional features of any religion or creed.” 

7.      That the Hon’ble 7-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court may be pleased to reconsider this defition of Hindutva in the light of the message transcended Srimad Bhagvad Gita. According to Sri Krishn (B.G.-2.16-29), the unreal never exists and the real is never without existence at any time. God alone is real permanent, indestructible, changeless and eternal, but heis beyond thought, imperceptible and quite above the fluttering of mind. Action is the name of the mode by which a man attains to God after subduing his mind. Putting this mode into practice is dharma, which is a trust or obligation. As Sri Krishn has told Arjun in the fortieth verse of Chapter 2 (Bhagvad Gita). “Since selfless action neither wears out the seed from which it sprang nor has any adverse consequence, even a partial observance of it liberates one from the dire terror of repeated birth and death.” So the undertaking of this action is Dharma. 

8.      That the final submission before this 7-Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India is that the last line in para 29 which says,”It may broadly be described as a way of life and nothing more” may be expunged/deleted from the pages of the said judgment.  

SUBMITTED BY:

 

 

PROF.BHIM SINGH

SR. ADVOCATE

NEW DELHI, 19.10.2016.

 

PM Modi’s praise for Israel’s surgical strikes against Palestine against India’s foreign policy

Prof.Bhim Singh, Chief Patron of National Panthers Party, world peace traveller and Sr. Advocate in the Supreme Court wrote the following letter to the Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi expressing his disappointment on the statement which the Prime Minister made during his speech in Himachal Pradesh praising Israel’s surgical strikes against the Palestinians. The letter is reproduced as under:-

“I am taking this liberty to write to your honour that India has been a Non-Aligned nation and has earned an international reputation as a Non-Aligned nation. India played a leading role in all international situations to ensure that international peace is maintained throughout the world. India’s role in Africa, South-East Asia, Arab World and in other conflict torn areas has been appreciated as beacon light throughout the world.

            Your honour is representing India, the lagest democracy in the world, which has played a leading role for the maintenance of international peace. Indian Prime Minister’s reaction equating, “The Indian Army’s surgical strikes (29th September, 2016) across the LoC with Israel’s exploits.”, is horrible.

            I being Law graduate of Master’s Degree from London University and Sr. Advocate of the Supreme Court of India would like to request the Hon’ble Prime Minister to come out with a bold stand that India has been supporting the United Nations for the establishment of Sovereign State of Palestine since thirties. India was one of the foremost Member of the United Nations who did not vote in the United Nations for the division of Palestine. India did not recognize creation of Israel in 1948. The Indian leadership since Gandhi’s era has stood for the establishment of State of Palestine as per command of Resolution 81 of the United Nations.

            The Israeli Govt. vastly known as ‘Zionist State’ has not accepted the UN Resolution till date and it has been bulldozing Palestine through so-called surgical strikes. The Indian Prime Minister’s statement comparing Israeli surgical strikes against the Palestinians with the so-called surgical strikes against Pakistan on 29thSeptember, 2016 does not deserve any appreciation by the Indian people who have been supporting the Palestinian movement for the recognition of State of Palestine by the United Nations. India has always supported the Palestinians and their leadership namely, Yasir Arafat in their movement to seek recognition of State of Palestine.

            I shall be grateful if Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi may rethink about the statement he has made vis-à-vis Israel’s surgical strikes against Palestine. Israeli strikes against the people of Palestine are being condemned by the entire world. Prime Minister’s statement, I guess, has been mis-projected or wrongly conveyed. This will be in the nation’s best interest that India does not slip away from the school of Non-Alignment. India has recognized Palestine as a state therefore the Prime Minister’s statement as it appeared in the press praising Israel for its unethnical, unconventional surgical strikes against Palestine which violate the four walls of the United Nations Charter.

            I hope that Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi may reconsider my request and go for withdrawing the statement he made on surgical strikes againstPalestinians by Israel. It shall be in the interest of the nation.”

Aligarian Bhim Singh congratulates the Aligarians for unique presentation of human love & Indian culture

Prof.Bhim Singh, Chief Patron of National Panthers Party today congratulated the staff and the students on the 199th Sir Syed Day celebration at Aligarh Muslim University which Sir Syed Ahmed Khan established in 1920. The University blossomed from a school which he founded in 1875. Prof.Bhim Singh was invited by the Celebration Committee being an Aligarian who studied from 1963 to 1966. Prof.Bhim Singh was imprisoned along with about 150 student leaders of AMU in 1965 for raising the voice of AMU for the preservation of University’s minority status. Prof.Bhim Singh acted as a Secretary of the Action Committee of the AMU and left remark of unity, brotherhood and secular ethos among the Aligarians.

Prof.Bhim Singh was received by the provost of Sir Ziauddin Hall in the University, Dr. Imran Salim as the Chief Guest on the occasion. Mrs. Roohi Zuveri, former Vice President-AMU and great grand daughter-in-law of Sir Ziauddin was Guest of Honour. There were hundreds of past students and the AMU intellectuals and former student leaders were present at the function organised in the Hall on the occasion of 199th Birth Anniversary of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan.

Prof.Bhim Singh congratulated the university staff, students and past students who have made a mark of achievements in the different fields of life, literature, politics, science as well as in art and literature.

Prof.Bhim Singh in his thanks message to the University organizer said that AMU is and shall be beacon light for the countrymen as well as to the world over, which has been spreading a lasting message of human love, glory and the growth of mankind for human peaceful co-existence which has been spreading from the corridor of Aligarh Muslim University founded by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan.

70th J&K Accession’s Anniversary with UOI shall be celebrated from Kanyakumari to Kashmir on 27th Oct.

 Prof.Bhim Singh, Founder of National Panthers Party and Sr. Advocate in the Supreme Court of India declared in an emergency committee meeting in New Delhi today that J&K National Panthers Party shall organize massive celebration on the 70th Anniversary of J&K Accession with the Union of India from Kanyakumari to Kashmir. Prof.Bhim Singh said that Maharaja Hari Singh signed the Instrument of Accession on 26th October, 1947 which was accepted on 27th October, 1947 by the then Governor-General of India, Lord Mountbatten.

          Prof.Bhim Singh said that the Accession signed by Maharaja Hari Singh is final, irrevocable and J&K acceded to the Union of India as per Act of British Parliament of of 1946. This Act provided that the rulers of the respective states of India under British Rule were only competent authority to sign the Instrument of Accession and nobody else. 576 states including J&K signed the Instruments of Accession with the Union of India including the State of J&K. Prof.Bhim Singh regretted that J&K was not included by the Constituent Assembly among the States which acceded to the Union of India. He said that the blunder committed by the Constituent Assembly had no legal affect on the nature of the accession. All those states (576) which signed the Instruments of Accession including J&K had become part and parcel (legitimate partners) of the Union of India.

          The so-called Constituent Assembly of J&K which was illegally floated in J&K had no relevance in the International Law and was totally void and against the letter and spirit of British Act of Parliament. This was the blunder committed by the then Govt. of India headed by the Congress Party which allowed the creation of a Constituent Assembly in J&K. Prof.Bhim Singh said that the Constituent Assembly of J&K had no legitimacy to take a decision on the legitimacy of J&K Accession with the Union of India signed by the ruler of J&K. Maharaja’s continuation as Monarch of J&K by the Constituent Assembly was highly provocative which was not accepted by the Maharaja as he himself left J&K on 5th March, 1948 and remained in exile in Bombay till his death in 1961.

          Prof.Bhim Singh that insertion of Article 370 amounted to a constitutional fraud with the people of J&K as they were deprived to share/take benefit of the fundamental rights/human rights at par with the citizens of India by inserting temporary provision Article 370 in the Constitution depriving the people of J&K of their basic and fundamental rights like their co-citizens of the country. Prof.Bhim Singh said that Article 370 should have been amended by the Parliament long before so that the people of J&K could also enjoy the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution of India. The rulers of Kashmir were given all the shelter/protection under Article 370 to continue their loot and plundering the state and tones of money that poured into J&K from the Indian people under the name of so-called autonomy. Prof.Bhim Singh said it is temporary provision of Article 370 which has kept the people of J&K under dictatorial rule of couple of families of J&K who have been looting and ruling J&K. Over 65% people in J&K have remained illiterate till this day. Thousands are locked in jails even today under the false pretext. Article 35(A) inserted in the Indian Constitution has blocked the flow of facilities provided in the fundamental rights to the people of J&K. Who has inserted Article 35(A) in the Indian Constitution? This should have been investigated by the Parliament today which is supreme. Prof.Bhim Singh said that this is time that Parliament of India shall amend Article 370 without any delay to ensure that people of J&K may also share the fruits of democracy after 70 years of misrule in J&K by the leaders and the politicians who have been ruling the state of J&K from 1947 till this day.

          Prof.Bhim Singh said that Panthers Party shall celebrate the Accession Day with a clear message to the people of India that the people of J&K stand for accession with the Union of India. It is only the Parliament of India which has blocked entry of J&K into the Union of India by erecting a wall of Article 370 between the Union of India and State of J&K. Prof.Bhim Singh said that people of J&K should be granted all benefits of fundamental rights provided in the Constitution of India. He said that the people of J&K have been deprived of the privileges and benefits provided in the Constitution of India. Even tri-colour flag of India has been deprived to the people of J&K as Parliament has given people of J&K a separate flag of a political party in place of tri-colour flag. Prof.Bhim Singh said that he shall celebrate the Accession Day of J&K in Kanyakumari on 27th October, 2016.

NPP Supremo visits LoC in Rajouri-Poonch Sector Calls on India and Pakistan to start dialogue for peace

Prof.Bhim Singh, Chief Patron of National Panthers Party with his Panthers Party of senior leaders started this morning from Jammu (Jammu Pradesh) and addressed several meetings of the mostly conflict torn areas of LoC in Districts of Jammu, Rajouri and Poonch.

          Several groups and displaced persons called Prof.Bhim Singh and demanded immediate protection from the Central Govt. for their physical survival and survival of their children. Prof.Bhim Singh and the team met hundreds of displaced persons at Akhnoor, Sunderbani and Rajouri addressing a strong gathering of Panthers Party activists, mostly youth, Prof.Bhim Singh told the cheering youth at Surankote (Poonch) that war was no solution, is no solution and shall be no solution to sort out family problems and conflicts between India and Pakistan. He said that people of J&K are living in 21st century and have immense experience of the past wars and battles in Europe, Latin America and other parts of the world. He said that people of J&K (from both sides of J&K) are capable, experienced and have tremendous capacity and human approach to work a resolution of their problems.

Prof.Bhim Singh declared that the 3rd Intra J&K ‘Heart to Heart’ Talk shall be held in December this year in Delhi if Pakistan shall not allow it in Islamabad. Prof.Bhim Singh said that the Intra J&K ‘Heart to Heart’ Talk of leaders and intellectuals of both sides of J&k including Gilgit-Baltistan was held in 2005 and 2007 when Dr. Manmohan Singh was the Prime Minister. Prof.Bhim Singh told the civil society in Surankote and in other meetings in Poonch District that he has taken up this issue with Prime Minister, Shri Narendra Modi and is hopeful that the Intra 3rd J&K ‘Heart to Heart’ Talk shall be held in December this year which is the only alternative/way out to find resolution of the problems related to J&K. The representatives of the political parties and the civil society from Gilgit, Baltistan, POK and J&K are capable and has commitment and strength to decide the issues by peaceful means. Prof.Bhim Singh rejected guns/wars for the resolution of any conflict vis-à-vis Jammu and Kashmir.

Ms. Anita Thakur, General Secretary-JKNPP strongly congratulated the people of Rajouri and Poonch for their unique national role right since 1947. She appealed the Panthers Party activists to involve all sections of the people including the lady political activists. She also raised the role of Scheduled Tribes and all sections of the people of Rajouri and Poonch to strengthen secular bonds and nationalist urge of the people of the area.

The meeting was presided over by the District President, Ashfaq Rana. The senior vice president, Mr. Kuldip Raj Sharma also addressed the meeting. Other who addressed the meeting included Provincial Secretary, Mr.Shanker Singh Chib and several other Panthers activists and panches and sarpanches.