Muslim vendors denied permission: Rules framed by Congress regime, says Minister J C Madhuswamy
Bengaluru, Mar 23: The Karnataka government on Wednesday sought to distance itself from the issue regarding denial of permission for Muslim traders and vendors to carry out business during Hindu festivals and annual temple fairs in parts of the state, citing rules.
Clarifying that the rule does not apply to street vendors outside the temple premises and action will be taken if any obstructions have been caused to them, the government said it will look into the rules and actual situation on the ground, before taking any further step on the matter.
This was in response to questions raised by opposition members in the legislative assembly following reports that banners were placed during the annual Kaup Marigudi festival in Udupi district, stating that Muslim vendors and traders should not be allowed entry.
Similar banners were also said to have been displayed at Padubidri temple festival, and also at couple of temples in Dakshina Kannada district.
"While framing rules to Karnataka Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments act in 2002, Rule 12 states that no property including land, building or site situated near the institution shall be leased to non-Hindus. Citing these rules, posters and banners have been put up," Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister J C Madhuswamy said.
Observing that it is being alleged street vendors are obstructed from engaging in trade, he said, if any obstruction is being caused to them, outside the premise of a religious place, it will be rectified and action will be taken.
"If things are happening (other community vendors trading) within the premises, they will have to follow the rules. Our (BJP) government did not formulate these rules. The rules were formulated by the Congress government in 2002 and now you are trying to put blame on us," he said, adding that rules should be followed.
Stating that the rules are wrong whoever may have made it, Leader of Opposition Siddaramaiah said when there is free trade such things cannot be allowed.
He urged the government to take action against those who are trying to disturb harmony and to restrict such activities. "How can anyone ask street vendors not to trade for religious reasons?" he questioned.
Intervening, Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai said areas near religious places during temple fairs are leased out and those who take on lease will give sublease to traders. "These decisions are by those who have taken lease...we will look into what the rules say and what has happened there on the ground," he said.
Raising the issue during Zero Hour, Congress' deputy leader in the assembly U T Khader said some forces are trying to disturb tranquility in the society by creating issues.
"When street vendors are earning their daily wages by trading, at some religious places banners are being put up stating that vendors from certain communities should not trade nearby. Some cruel-minded cowards are doing it. No religion supports it," he said.
Some BJP MLAs, including K G Bopaiah, took strong objection to usage of the word coward, leading to heated exchange between some opposition Congress and ruling party members.
Clarifying that he has not taken any religion's name, Khader questioned why police are not acting against people putting up such banners, and urged the government to take strict action against those trying to spread communal hatred.
Another Congress MLA Rizwan Arshad said an attempt is being made to disturb harmony by putting banners and posters that traders and vendors from a particular community should not trade near a religious place.
Some fundamental organisations are supporting such things, Arshad said as he asked the government to take action, pointing out that this is the time of temple fairs and Urs, and to protect the constitutional rights of people.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Questioning religious practices will break religion, civilisation: SC in Dawoodi Bohras case
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Thursday remarked that if individuals start questioning certain religious practices or matters of religion before a constitutional court then there will be hundreds of petitions questioning different rituals, leading to the breaking of religions and the civilisation.
The nine-judge Constitution bench is hearing petitions related to discrimination against women at religious places, including the Sabarimala temple in Kerala, and on the ambit and scope of the religious freedom practised by multiple faiths, including Dawoodi Bohras.
The bench comprises Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices B V Nagarathna, M M Sundresh, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Aravind Kumar, Augustine George Masih, Prasanna B Varale, R Mahadevan and Joymalya Bagchi.
The Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community filed a PIL in 1986 seeking the setting aside of a 1962 judgment, which had struck down the Bombay Prevention of Excommunication Act, 1949 -- this law made excommunication of any community member illegal.
The 1962 Constitution bench judgment said, "It is evident from the religious faith and tenets of the Dawoodi Bohra community that the exercise of the power of excommunication by its religious head on religious grounds formed part of the management of its affairs in matters of religion and the 1949 Act in making even such excommunication invalid, infringed the right of the community under Article 26(b) of the Constitution."
Senior advocate Raju Ramachandran, representing a group of reformist Dawoodi Bohras, submitted that a practice which is conducted in response to secular and social actions of an individual cannot be the subject of Constitutional protection under Article 25 of the Constitution and consequently cannot be a ‘matter of religion’ under Article 26 of the Constitution.
Ramachandran told the court that a practice which may have a religious aspect but also significantly and adversely impacts fundamental rights is not immune to restriction under Article 25 of the Constitution or Article 26 of the Constitution.
Responding to the submission, Justice Nagarathna said that if everybody starts questioning certain religious practices or matters of religion before a constitutional court, then "what happens to this civilisation where religion is so intimately connected with the Indian society".
"There will be hundreds of petitions questioning this right that right, opening of the temple, and the closure of the temple. We are conscious of this," she said.
Adding to the response, Justice Sundresh said, "Every religion will break and every constitutional court will have to be closed.
"If the dispute between two entities are allowed then everybody will question everything. In your case there may be a civil wrong committed to you but in another case, another member will say I don't agree. It is regressive. To what extent can we go in a country like ours which is progressive and on the move is the question," he said.
Justice Nagarathna went on that what sets apart India from any other region is that "we are a civilisation" despite having so many pluralities and diversities?
Asserting that diversity is the country's strength, she added, "One of the constants in our Indian society is the relationship of human beings -- man, woman and child -- with the religion."
"Now, how a religious practice or a matter of religion is questioned, where it is questioned, whether it can be questioned, whether it has to be a question within a denomination for a reform or whether the state will have to do or you want the court to adjudicate upon all these aspects. This is troubling us.
"What we lay down, is for a civilisation that is India. India must progress despite all its economy, everything there is a constant in us. We can’t break that constant. That is what is troubling us ," she said.
Ramachandran replied that India is a civilisation under the Constitution and therefore nothing which goes against the grain of constitution can be continued in a civilised society.
He said that's where court's task come in and "it can't throw hands" and say there will be so many petitions.
