AAP objects to heritage adoption scheme in Goa
Panaji, May 1: The AAP in Goa on Tuesday objected to the Central government's decision to allot six heritage sites in the coastal state along with several others throughout the country for adoption by private companies.
"Now they admit that they cannot protect our monuments and want to sell them to outsiders in the name of adoption. They cannot protect our land, our rivers and our rights," Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) state General Secretary Pradeep Padgaonkar told reporters here.
The statement comes a few days after the Central government's decision to privatise heritage conservation, even as the Bharatiya Janata Party-led coalition government in the state has come under fire for promoting hasty conversion of land in natural heritage zones for commercial exploitation.
"Efforts by these vested interests, especially regional ruling alliance partner Goa Forward, to allow adoption of monuments by private companies, in Goa's case by a private lifeguarding company should be stopped," Padgaonkar said.
In Goa, Drishti Marine and V-Resorts have been shortlisted for participation in the 'Monument Mitra' scheme, aimed at developing monuments and heritage sites with the help of private participation for five years.
Drishti Marine is set to adopt key heritage areas like the Old Goa Church complex, Aguada, Cabo de Rama and Chapora fort, a lighthouse and Morjim beach, famous for Olive Ridley turtle nesting sites.
V-Resorts will be adopting the Basilica of Bom Jesus church, which is several centuries old.
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.
Karnataka HC quashes FIR against three men accused of 'preaching Islam' near temple premises
Bengaluru, Jul 25 (PTI): The Karnataka High Court has quashed a First Information Report (FIR) filed against three Muslim men who were accused of "preaching Islam" and distributing religious pamphlets near a Hindu temple in Jamkhandi, Bagalkot district.
The complaint had alleged that the men attempted religious conversion by making promises of employment and passed derogatory remarks about Hinduism.
However, the High Court held that there was no substantial evidence of coercion, fraud, or inducement--criteria necessary for prosecution under the Karnataka Protection of Right to Freedom of Religion Act, 2022.
The court made it clear that mere expression or distribution of religious literature does not amount to an offence unless accompanied by forceful or deceitful attempts to convert.
"The essence of a free society lies in the freedom to express, discuss, and propagate beliefs," the bench observed.
It further stated that peaceful preaching, in the absence of coercion or allurement, is protected under Article 25 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to freely profess and propagate one's religion.
Additionally, the bench noted that the complainant in the case was neither the alleged victim nor a relative of one. As per Section 4 of the 2022 Act, only an aggrieved individual or their close relatives are permitted to lodge such complaints--making the FIR procedurally invalid.
