The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a petition seeking a “renaming commission” to ascertain the original names of ancient historical-cultural religious places named after “barbaric foreign invaders” stating that a country cannot remain a prisoner of the past.
Questioning the intent of the plea, a bench of Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna asked the petitioner, advocate and BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay, if he wanted to keep the country on the boil. You want to keep this as a live issue and keep the country on a boil? Fingers are pointed at a particular community. You run down a particular section of society. India is a secular State, this is a secular forum,” Justice Joseph said, coming down heavily on Upadhyay, LiveLaw reported.
The petitioner had sought the setting up of a “Renaming Commission of India” and sought direction to the Archaeological Survey of India to conduct research and publish the initial names of ancient, historical cultural religious places, which were named by “barbaric foreign invaders”.
Justice Nagarathna also expressed displeasure at the petition and advised the petitioner not to bring back the divide-and-rule policy of the British. “Hinduism is a way of life, and because of that India has assimilated everybody. Because of that, we are able to live together. The divide-and-rule policy of the British brought about a schism in our society. Let us not bring that back,” LiveLaw quoted Justice Nagarathna as saying.
Upadhyay, however, sought to highlight that several places of historical importance mentioned in Vedas and Puranas have been renamed after foreign invaders.
“We have roads after Lodhi, Ghazni, Ghori….there is no single road named after Pandavas, though Indraprastha was constructed by Yudhishtir …Faridabad named after person who looted the city”, he submitted. “What is the relationship of Aurangazeb, Lodhi, Ghazni etc with India?” he asked.
Justice Nagarathna, however wondered how invasions could be wished away from history. “It’s a historical fact… We have been invaded several times. Have we not got other problems in our country rather than wishing away for things which happened before?” he observed. “Hinduism is a way of life. There is no bigotry in Hinduism,” Justice Nagarathna added.
Hinduism is the greatest religion in terms of metaphysics, observed Justice Joseph. “The heights which Hinduism have in Upanishads, Vedas, Bhagvad Gita is unequal in any system. We should be proud of that. Please don’t belittle it. We have to understand our own greatness. Our greatness should lead us to be magnanimous. But I am equally fond of Hinduism. I am trying to study it. You read the works of Dr S Radhakrishan on Hindu philosophy,” Justice Joseph said.
The bench then went on to dismiss the petition after the petitioner sought to withdraw his plea and approach the ministry concerned with his grievance.
“India that is Bharat is a secular country. A country cannot remain a prisoner of the past. India is wedded to rule of law, secularism, constitutionalism of which Article 14 stands out as the grand guarantee of both equality and fairness in State action. The founding fathers contemplated India to be a Republic which is not merely confined to having an elected President which is the conventional understanding but also involves all sections of people; it is a democracy. It is important that the country must move forward,” the court noted in its order.
(With LiveLaw.in)