In Ujjain case, SC merely approved the temple authority’s adoption of a suggestion made by an expert body to protect the stone structure from deterioration.
New Delhi: Are courts interfering with Hindu practices and imposing restrictions on the right to practise religion? A set of judicial orders has started this debate and it has gained traction particularly on social media. ThePrint looks at three such significant orders passed by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) and the Supreme Court that shatter this perception.
Myth 1: The NGT has banned chanting of ‘mantras’ or ‘jaykaras’ in Amarnath.
Fact: There has been no such ban. As part of a series of orders on Amarnath and Vaishno Devi, the NGT has simply stated that the “area of the holy cave only shall be treated as a silent zone” in an order passed on 13 November. The cave has always been a silent zone.
In fact, a day after the order was passed, Justice Swatanter Kumar, chairperson of the tribunal, issued a clarification that chanting was not restricted in the cave. In 2015, Gauri Maulekhi, an animal welfare activist and aide to Union minister Maneka Gandhi, had moved the tribunal against the government of Jammu and Kashmir. Her petition sought to create a rehabilitation plan for mules and horses used for transport in these shrines and putting in place a waste management system in the region.
Myth 2: The NGT has banned use of wood for funeral pyres in cremation grounds.
Fact: In January 2016, a bench of the tribunal headed by Justice U.D. Salvi ruled on a petition filed by advocate D.M. Bhalla seeking provisions for use of alternative fuel for cremation since burning of wood has an adverse impact on the environment.
The tribunal, explicitly refused to ban wood used in funeral pyres. The reasons, strikingly, was that it “involves both question of faith and of the circumstances in which the people live”.
Myth 3: The apex court made new norms for worshipping at the ancient Mahakaleshwar Jyotirlinga temple in Ujjain, banned several ancient practices.
Fact: The apex court had merely approved the temple authority’s adoption of recommendations made by an expert body to “protect the lingam of Mahakaleshwar”. In fact, it was the central government that had set up an expert body after the temple authorities took note of reports that the deity was shrinking. Some of the recommendations of the expert committee specify the substances that can be brought in contact with the stone structure in the sanctum sanctorum to protect it from deterioration.