Sanatan Prabhat > Post Type > News > National News > ‘No ban on speaking about Hindu Rashtra, but the Constitution does not permit it’ : Former SC judge

‘No ban on speaking about Hindu Rashtra, but the Constitution does not permit it’ : Former SC judge

Former Supreme Court Justice Madan Bhimrao Lokur remarks

New Delhi – “What is the constitutional basis for the demand for a Hindu Rashtra ? Is it possible ? If someone believes that the country should become a Hindu Rashtra, that is their ideology. The Constitution does not permit it. However, if someone says this should happen, it does not mean they should be thrown in the prison. If people are inciting others, that is wrong. But if it is for discussion, a debate can take place,” said former Supreme Court Justice Madan Bhimrao Lokur. (The demand for a welfare-oriented Hindu Rashtra and incitement have no connection whatsoever. Why does the honourable former Justice not say that the demand by Jihadis to turn India into an Islamic nation is inciteful ? – Editor) He was speaking in a recent interview with a Hindi newspaper. Justice Lokur has been appointed President of the United Nations Internal Justice Council. His term will last until 2028. He served in the Supreme Court for six years.

Justice Lokur further remarked,

1.     For 150–200 years, the statue of Lady Justice had a blindfold. Why it was removed, only the Government can explain. Justice, whether for a judge or a common man, must be equal for all. Once the blindfold is removed, one might notice that this is a prominent person or a political leader, and a ruling should favour them. (Even with the blindfold, it is well-known that political leaders or wealthy individuals have frequently misused their power and positions to manipulate the justice system. This cannot be ignored – Editor)

2.     Regarding the new criminal justice and telecommunications laws, Justice Lokur said that their impact would effectively restrict the fundamental rights granted to ordinary citizens by the Constitution. (If a democratically elected Government has passed these laws in Parliament, does the honourable former Justice’s statement not amount to his distrust in democracy itself ? – Editor)

Editorial Perspectives

  • The demand for Hindu Rashtra aligns with the freedom of expression and pursuing it through democratic means is entirely constitutional. Let us not overlook this fact.
  • During the Emergency of 1976, the Indira Gandhi Government unconstitutionally added the word ‘secularism’ to the Constitution. Hon’ble Judge should address this first.

Latest Articles