It’s hard to build a house, run a business, or do anything without paying bribes. And yet, citizens’ anger about this open, unchecked corruption won’t erupt into Anna Hazare-type rallies.
As many as 21 policy reforms are under implementation following Invest Kerala Global Summit, as LDF govt works to change perception that the state is not conducive to businesses.
Amid continued concerns over cross-border terrorism, General Upendra Dwivedi further warned the neighbour that India will not show restraint if there is an Op Sindoor 2.0.
Pakistan’s army has been a rentier force available to a reasonable bidder. It has never come to the aid of any Muslims including Palestinians or the Gazans, except making noises here and there.
“On 28 September, the apex court, in a majority 2:1 judgment, declined to refer its 1994 Ismail Faruqui judgment to a larger bench.
“The 1994 ruling — which allowed the central government to acquire the disputed 2.77 acres — held that praying in mosques is not an essential religious practice in Islam, and the Sunni Waqf Board claimed that it prejudiced the Ram Janmabhoomi case against it.”
The above is a quote from the present article. The same writer, Ritika Jain, had written in THE PRINT on a related subject on 27 September 2018. I wish quote from my comment to that article:
“Out of general curiosity, I googled for the “Ismail Faruqui Judgement” that is mentioned in this article. I am copy-pasting the initial portions of the Order, only the first two points of it. You would notice that the order quotes from Jonathan Swift, and Swami Vivekananda. If the honorable judges were fond of citing quotations to push their argument, why didn’t they find a quotation from the Quran which would be more relevant to the case? Anyway, I am no one to comment on the judges’ judgement, but I thought I would bring this to the attention of fellow readers of this article. The Order is a long one, but I did glimpse at the whole, couldn’t understand much, but the word “Quran” wasn’t mentioned anywhere. Have a look:
——-
Dr. M. Ismail Faruqui Etc, Mohd. … vs Union Of India And Others on 24 October, 1994
Equivalent citations: AIR 1995 SC 605 A
Bench: M V Verma, G Ray, S Bharucha
ORDER
“1. We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another.” – Jonathan Swift
2. Swami Vivekananda said –
Religion is not in doctrines, in dogmas, nor in intellectual argumentation; it is being and becoming, it is realisation.
This thought comes to mind as we contemplate the roots of this controversy. Genesis of this dispute is traceable to erosion of some fundamental values of the plural commitments of our polity…”
——-
(End of my quote about that Order)
The important point is, in the Ismail Faruqui case, the judges were deliberating on whether praying in mosques is an essential part of religious practices of Islam or not. If such was their subject, then why did the learned judges of that 1995 case NOT EVEN ONCE REFER TO THE QURAN, OR PROPHET MUHAMMAD’S HADITH IN THEIR ENTIRE JUDGMENT? If they were searching for something in the religious practices of Islam, then how could they ignore these two ONLY SOURCES on Islam? Which other source would have told them what are the religious practices of Islam?
“On 28 September, the apex court, in a majority 2:1 judgment, declined to refer its 1994 Ismail Faruqui judgment to a larger bench.
“The 1994 ruling — which allowed the central government to acquire the disputed 2.77 acres — held that praying in mosques is not an essential religious practice in Islam, and the Sunni Waqf Board claimed that it prejudiced the Ram Janmabhoomi case against it.”
The above is a quote from the present article. The same writer, Ritika Jain, had written in THE PRINT on a related subject on 27 September 2018. I wish quote from my comment to that article:
“Out of general curiosity, I googled for the “Ismail Faruqui Judgement” that is mentioned in this article. I am copy-pasting the initial portions of the Order, only the first two points of it. You would notice that the order quotes from Jonathan Swift, and Swami Vivekananda. If the honorable judges were fond of citing quotations to push their argument, why didn’t they find a quotation from the Quran which would be more relevant to the case? Anyway, I am no one to comment on the judges’ judgement, but I thought I would bring this to the attention of fellow readers of this article. The Order is a long one, but I did glimpse at the whole, couldn’t understand much, but the word “Quran” wasn’t mentioned anywhere. Have a look:
——-
Dr. M. Ismail Faruqui Etc, Mohd. … vs Union Of India And Others on 24 October, 1994
Equivalent citations: AIR 1995 SC 605 A
Bench: M V Verma, G Ray, S Bharucha
ORDER
“1. We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another.” – Jonathan Swift
2. Swami Vivekananda said –
Religion is not in doctrines, in dogmas, nor in intellectual argumentation; it is being and becoming, it is realisation.
This thought comes to mind as we contemplate the roots of this controversy. Genesis of this dispute is traceable to erosion of some fundamental values of the plural commitments of our polity…”
——-
(End of my quote about that Order)
The important point is, in the Ismail Faruqui case, the judges were deliberating on whether praying in mosques is an essential part of religious practices of Islam or not. If such was their subject, then why did the learned judges of that 1995 case NOT EVEN ONCE REFER TO THE QURAN, OR PROPHET MUHAMMAD’S HADITH IN THEIR ENTIRE JUDGMENT? If they were searching for something in the religious practices of Islam, then how could they ignore these two ONLY SOURCES on Islam? Which other source would have told them what are the religious practices of Islam?