What TV doesn't, print can't; we deliver.
What TV doesn't, print can't; we deliver.
Delhi High Court dismissed a petition on Wednesday that sought the establishment of a Board for the Protection of Sanatana Dharma, similar to the Waqf Board that serves the welfare of the Muslim community.
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition on Wednesday that sought the establishment of a Board for the Protection of Sanatana Dharma, similar to the Waqf Board that serves the welfare of the Muslim community.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela emphasized that matters of this nature, concerning the creation of such bodies, are the domain of policymaking and are beyond judicial intervention. “We cannot do anything in this,” remarked Chief Justice Manmohan during the proceedings.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court differentiates between consensual relationships, false promises of marriage
The petition was filed by the Sanatan Hindu Sewa Sangh Trust, a religious group that expressed concern over alleged attacks on the principles and practices of Sanatana Dharma by followers of other religions. The Trust highlighted the absence of a dedicated government body to safeguard the rights, customs, and traditions associated with Sanatana Dharma, as well as to address grievances related to its protection.
The petitioners claimed that despite submitting multiple representations to the government seeking the establishment of such a Board, they had not received any response. As a result, they sought judicial intervention, hoping that the Court would direct the creation of an official body similar to the Waqf Board, which protects the interests of the Muslim community.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court seeks Ashish Mishra’s response on witness threat allegations in Lakhimpur Kheri case
However, the Court found that the matter was more suited to be addressed by the government and policymakers rather than the judiciary. In its ruling, the Court disposed of the petition but granted the petitioner the liberty to approach the government for further action. The decision has drawn mixed reactions, with supporters of the petition viewing it as a missed opportunity for religious protection, while others believe it reaffirms the separation of powers between the judiciary and government.
