Adultery law treats women as chattel and lowers their dignity 

                Parmanand Pandey

         

        Section 497 of the IPC deals with adultery and it is considered to be a cruelty by the husband on the wife but not the vice versa. Thus, it is not based on gender equality. However, Supreme Court and other High Courts are now crystallising the adultery cases by pronouncing that to have the extra marital cannot termed to cruelty. Let us first see what section 497 says, "Whoever has sexual intercourse with a person who is and whom he knows or has reason to believe to be the wife of another man, without the consent or connivance of that man, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, is guilty of the offence of adultery, and shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years or with fine or with both. In such case the wife shall not be punishable as an abettor."

        Conscientious people have been raising this question as to why a woman is still treated like chattel although she has made giant strides in all fields.  Even if a married woman seduces a man to have sexual intercourse with her betraying in the most her own husband she is not even slightly punished or even fined. Why is it that only the man who has to go to jail for a term of up to five years? This law of adultery is more than 150 years old and therefore no right person in his or her senses would like to retain it in the present form. This section 497 of the Indian Penal Code  wrongly assumes a woman to be incapable of having a sound mind and exempts her from punishment even though she herself may lure a man and prompt him to have sexual relations with her with her own free consent. Does it appear to be strange in the twenty first centuary that a woman can be adulterous but she cannot be prosecuted. On the one hand , it gives a blank cheque to a woman to misuse it but on the other hand, her position is no  better than that of the property of the husband. Why is it that a married woman can indulge in sexual relations with as many men as she likes and yet is not held liable in anyway? Why is it that a woman is treated as personal property of the husband under our law? 

Why is it that a woman who after getting educated from highly reputed educational hubs, getting a top corporate or government job like IAS, IPS etc; is still considered incapable as a person and therefore in spite of being married and sleeping with some person other than her husband is not punishable under IPC? How can this be justified by any sane person? How can a woman who betrays the unflinching faith of her husband and sleeps with some other person be allowed to escape unpunished ?

      In Pinakin Mahipatray Rawal Vs State of Gujarat , the Supreme court said, that Marital relationship means the legally protected marital  interest  of one spouse to another which  include marital  obligation  to  another  like companionship,  living  under  the  same  roof,  sexual  relation and   the exclusive enjoyment of them, to have children, their  up-bringing,  services in the home, support, affection, love,  liking  and  so  on.   Extra-marital relationship as such is not defined in the IPC.   The court said that merely being "intimate" with another woman is not sufficient ground for a man to be held guilty of inflicting cruelty on his wife on the charge of failing to discharge his marital obligations. The ruling came in a case where the wife committed suicide suspecting the husband of intimacy with a woman colleague in office. The trial court and the Gujarat high court held him guilty under Section 498A for causing cruelty to his wife and under Section 306 of IPC for abetting suicide.  "Harassment, of course, need not be in the form of physical assault and even mental harassment also would come within the purview of section 498A IPC. Mental cruelty, of course, varies from person to person, depending upon the intensity and the degree of endurance, some may meet with courage and some others suffer in silence, to some it may be unbearable and a weak person may think of ending one's life," the bench said.   Following the ratio decidendi of  K.V. Prakash Babu Vs State of Karnataka, the Supreme Court said that 'we intend to make it clear that if the husband gets involved in an extra-marital affair that may not in all circumstances invite conviction under Section 306 of the IPC but definitely that can be a ground for divorce or other reliefs in a matrimonial dispute under other enactments'.  Similarly the Delhi High Court has also termed the adultery charge very painful for the spouse and has therefore granted divorce on this ground in the case Harjit Kaur Vs Surinder Singh. 

       It must be mentioned here that many countries have decriminalised adultery. IPC is the creation of Britishers,who inserted Section 497 as a penal offence. What is more surprising is that England itself has decriminalised adultery and does not treat it as a criminal offence. It is high time that this law is revisited even in India and amended to meet the present circumstances. 

        In France, the wife is punishable with a minimum term of three months to a maximum of two years but discretion rests with the husband to terminate the sentence and accept her again as his wife. The adulterer is also similarly punished. It must be noted here that in Malaysia, Hong Kong and Singapore and many other countries adultery is not punishable at all. In Pakistan and most Islamic countries, adultery can be punishable with death and very harsh punishment is inflicted. In most of the states of USA it is either not punishable or both the parties indulging in adultery are equally punished and there is no gender discrimination. In Philippines, it is the married woman who is alone held accountable. Will our law makers think of enacting the  law that is more in tune with the times for upholding the dignity of women at par with men? This is the crying need of the hour.

Well Deserved Contempt Notice To Justice Katju

Anybody, who has seen Justice Markandey Katju on the Supreme Court bench and has been following his writings in newspapers and blogs after his retirement would hardly have any doubt that he often goes berserk, unreasonable and facetious. The recent example is his offer to Pakistan of giving Kashmir along with Bihar. Very recently he made the most scandalous statement about the IQ and scholarship of all Supreme Court Judges except the two. Therefore, the contempt notice issued against him is well deserved and Justice Gogoi needs to be complemented for this bold decision. It is true that one can severely criticise the judgments and there will be no contempt of the court but once motives are attributed to the judges, it becomes the contempt of the court. And who should know better than Justice Katju? But regrettably, more often than not, he ends up criticising the judges rather than their judgements.

I was also present in the Courtroom no.6 yesterday from 2 P.M to 4.15 P.M till the Court rose after dictating the order of issuing the contempt notice to Justice Katju. The arrogance and sarcasm of Justice Katju was resonating from every sentence of his address to the Court, when he tried to give more importance to the ‘common sense’ over the ‘codified Criminal law’ and well defined sections 6 and 113 of the Evidence act. He over emphasised on the ‘believability’ arising out of the ‘common sense’ than the ‘admissibility of evidence’. Justice Katju was adamant on the application of common sense even when Justice U.U.Lalit tried to drive his point home that in the absence of admissibility the Supreme Court cannot conjure up the reliability. Belying all my hopes, there was no novelty in the arguments of justice Katju. In fact, it was an uninspiring piece of banality devoid of any spark of brilliance.  

The conduct of Justice Katju even when he was on the Bench of the Supreme Court was unbecoming to the exalted post that he held. He used to make fun of even the respected Senior Lawyers of the bar.  The bench is supposed to be respectful to any lawyer, even if he or she is new to the profession, but Justice Katju used to get sadistic pleasure in misbehaving with the Lawyers. That apart, Justice Katju had been most erratic, arbitrary, unreasonable and the worst violator of Judicial discipline as a judge. He has himself admitted in a blog post that as the Judge of Allahabad High Court he used to grant bail invariably to all Pakistani Nationals, who were to be deported by the government for overstaying in India. He has self-confessed that he used to grant interim relief with view to helping Pakistani citizens so that they could stay in India either till their death or become so old that Government would not repatriate them on the humane ground. Can there be anything more ridiculous and inexcusable act on the part of a judge who has taken the oath of the Constitution of India? Obviously, Justice Katju considers himself to be a law onto himself and conveniently forgets even the Constitution of India if it comes into his whimsical path.

 Not long ago, Justice Katju unilaterally branded Mahatma Gandhi and Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose as the agents of British Government. His baseless assertions about of two iconic figures of India’s freedom movement left millions of countrymen into daze and utter shock. He did not give any proof in support of his wild opinion against these legendary persons. When the Indian Parliament unanimously passed a resolution condemning Justice Katju, he filed a Writ Petition in the Supreme Court of India alleging that his Fundamental Rights of ‘free speech and expression’ have been trampled upon because the Indian Parliament never gave him any opportunity of hearing before passing resolution against him. Incidentally, when this Writ Petition was being argued by the senior lawyer Gopal Subramanian in the Court of Justice T.S Thakur (as he was not a CJI then), I was also present in the Court to conduct my own case, I found that Justice Thakur was at his courteous best but he was very firm in sending a message to Justice Katju that he (Justice) cannot have unbridled freedom of speech and expression. Look at temerity and absurdity of Justice Katju that he wants to demean Gandhi and Bose in the name of his right of freedom of speech and expression but has no compunction in denying the same rights to others even to the Members of Parliament. Even yesterday, during the review- hearing of the Saumaya’ case Justice Gogoi always addressed with honorific Justice Katju but it was not returned to him with same respect from Katju Saheb. So much so, that he wanted to impress upon with the ludicrous logic of being once senior to Justice Gogoi in the Supreme Court.

As far his judgements are concerned, particularly on the labour laws, are like nightmares. His understanding of labour laws was/is shallow and highly retrogressive. The sooner they are set aside the better for the working class of the country.

Anyway, let us see how he replies to the Contempt notice.

Bribe, laxity and incompetence define offices in Uttar Pradesh

Azamgarh is the Lok Sabha constituency of the Samajwadi Supremo Mulayam Singh Yadav. His son Akhilesh Yadav is the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh. There are many ministers in the cabinet of Shri Akhilesh Yadav who hail from the district. However, if you go to Azamgarh, you will not find anything that gives you the feel of any VIP constituency. Go to the District Hospital and witness the horrible condition of the patients. There are many class-1 dispensaries in the district with reasonably good buildings sans doctors and other medical equipment. Private doctors are literally rolling in money. People are being fleeced by the private doctors and the owners of the shanty Hospitals day in and day out because there is no choice left for them. The government finds itself thoroughly incapable of having any control over its own hospitals.

I was in Azamgarh last week for three days and had to go to the many offices for a small personal work. In normal course, I should not have been harassed to go to the offices yet the Babus made me run for two days. I went to the PWD office to take the compensation of my land, which was acquired by the state government for construction of the approach road in 2013. I must have written half a dozen letters to different District Magistrates and Executive Engineers of the PWD from time to time for the sake of the payment of petty amount of compensation but every time I got the evasive reply from them. During this visit I first met the present District Magistrate, Suhas L.Y., who is a well behaved Kannadiga. He is a very young, dashing officer indeed and is not more than 35 years. He was very warm and courteous to me and assured me that the compensation would be given in the shortest possible time. He agreed with me that the Administration should have taken my bank account number and identity proof and instead of giving the cheque, the money could have been directly transferred to the bank account. This method should have been adopted in the cases of all land owners, whose lands have been acquired. This is certainly very logical but in government offices, logic hardly works. The D.M. asked his OSD to contact the concerned Executive Engineer, who was in the state capital Lucknow on that day. The energetic District Magistrate then told me to meet the Executive Engineer the next day and get the compensation amount then and there as his instructions would have been conveyed to him by then.

As advised by District Magistrate I went to the office of the Executive Engineer Mr. K. Gore. He was not in the office, then somebody suggested me to go to his residence, which is barely 25 meters away from his office. The Executive Engineer was cordial and he assured me to cooperate to the fullest possible. However, he also told me that the payment of compensation would require some paper work, which in fact is a lot of paper work. Thereafter started my travails. I was asked to go along with an Amin, who took me from one office room to other, from one Engineer to the other.

After three hours of hectic running from one place to the other, I thought that the amount would be handed over to me but in the end I was told by the Executive Engineer to reach to the office of the Tehsil Sub Registrar next day to relinquish the land in favour of the department to receive the cheque in lieu thereof. I was also asked to bring two witnesses with their photographs and identity cards. Tehsil building is 18 kms away from my village and nearly 35 kms from the District headquarters of Azamgarh. I had no choice but to go to the Tehsil office at Burhanpur. There are many deed writers, who sit in Tehsil building, whose introduction to the new technology is confined to only mobile phones and photocopiers. One of them wrote deed of my land in long hands, witnesses were made to sign, their photographs were taken, fingerprints of the buyer and sellers were also obtained at many places in the register.

Deed writing in long hands takes nearly one and half hours but if the computers are allowed to be used, it can be done in 7 or 8 minutes. After nearly four hours of strain the cheque for Rs. 85000/- was given to me. The anomaly in the rate of the compensation is clearly visible. Those who had taken the compensation in 2013 before the Land Acquisition Bill was passed they also got the same amount, which I was given three years thereafter in 2016. I was told that if the compensation had been given to me as per new rates, I could have got nearly Rs. 45 lakhs. But there is no use in arguing with the employees in the district administration. In fact, there is no government worth name in Uttar Pradesh. It is the writ of Revenue officials, Police and Babus of various departments runs in the entire state. They listen to you only when you are a politician or an influential moneyed man, otherwise you have to suffer at their hands and pay them bribe for the movement of files. A euphemistic word ‘speed money’ is used for bribes.

The offices of the Sub-Registrar in the Tehsils across the state of Uttar Pradesh reek with the corruption, laxity and incompetence. Their non-cooperation to both buyers and sellers is seen to be believed. While the buyers will be asked to cough up the money to do the work the sellers are be treated with disdain. This deplorable condition prevails in almost all offices. But in Police Stations, Hospitals, Courts, PWD offices, Sales Tax Offices and Sub Registrar Offices, the condition is very appalling. I have not been able to understand while the technology is not being used, which is bound to bring efficiency, and rid the offices from corruption to a large extent. Technology will also considerably save time, money and harassment of the public. Computerisation has been adopted with half-hearted approach in all offices. The employees working in the government offices come and go at their own sweet wills. While the condition of roads has certainly improved in the present regime of Akhilesh Yadav, the law and order situation has touched its nadir. Electricity supply is very erratic. Sometimes the electricity is supplied in the day time and sometimes in the night. People have no alternative but suffer in silence. 

Technology can work wonder in administration of justice

Former President of India K.R. Narayanan once famously said ‘Courts in India are like casinos’. Satyamev Jayate (truth prevails), is emblazoned in all courts across the country but justice is often denied to most of the litigants. One cannot say it for certain that he or she would get the justice despite the law and facts in his/her favour.  

Illustrious writer Charles Dickens wrote a famous novel ‘Bleak House’, which deals with a well-known fictional case ‘Jarndyce and Jarndyce’. In the case of family dispute two members approach the court which took so much time that by the time the judgment came, both of them not only became old but pauper as well.  More or less the same story is still found in India where the cases linger on, from one court to other, for years nay, decades together. By the time the justice is delivered it loses all relevance for the parties.

This trite sentence of ‘justice delayed is justice denied’ is being heard in India for decades. Surprisingly nothing tangible has been done so far to rectify it. There is a Law Commission in India. which has submitted many reports for improvement in the justice delivery system but they all have been of no avail. Members of Parliament, cutting across party lines, cry from the house tops for the simplification of the justice delivery system but they also have miserably failed to give any solution. Similarly judges and lawyers speak volumes for making the justice ‘cheap and speedy’ but the result is here for all to see.

Coming to the main point nobody knows it for sure in what way the judgement will go. That is why, the metaphor of casino may appear to be derogatory but that is a true statement of fact. In India we do not have the inquisitorial system of justice. Our is adversarial system, where delay is inherent. The plaintiff approaches the court then the reply comes from the other party, which again is replied by the complainant or claimant. The documentary proofs are filed as evidence then both parties and their witnesses are cross examined. Finally, the advocates argue the case with the citations of the precedents of the case laws and other relevant materials. Ultimately the decision is pronounced by the judge which takes many years. Needless to mention both parties and their advocates adopt unethical methods to win the case. Advocates are expected to be the friends and the officers of the courts and their job is to help in the just administration of justice. But when you speak to any lawyer, he will tell that he is more accountable to his client, who has paid him because clients want him to win the case by means fair or foul. And that is why, the element of dishonesty has crept into the justice delivery system right from litigants up to the level of the judges. There is case of a workman K.K. Verma, who started fighting for his reinstatement in service in 1985, won his case from the Labour Court but the matter is still pending in the Delhi High Court, although he has retired two years back. Is it not sordid commentary on the justice delivery system?

The adversarial system of justice is, without doubt, time consuming but with the help of modern technology revolutionary changes can be brought about in the administration of justice. The number of judges in the ratio of population and litigation is certainly an important factor but only by increasing the number of judges speedy justice cannot been ensured unless and until the modern technology is introduced in full measure. For example, the filing of the cases can be done though the electronic medium without wasting much of the time in registry, defects can be cured without creating any hassle. Evidences can be recorded through video. A time slot can be allotted to advocates to argue the cases. The adjournments on flimsy grounds should be stopped and if adjournments are sought on unconvincing grounds then reasonable cost should be imposed. The technology can work wonder and therefore it is the only ray of hope. It will kick out in competent judges, insincere lawyers and litigation loving litigants.

How the Supreme Court can reduce its burden?

Mondays and Fridays are the miscellaneous days in the Supreme Court of India. Court Rooms get so crowded that it often becomes difficult to reach in the front row when the case is called for hearing. One cannot move in the lobbies without grazing others. Nearly one thousand cases, mainly Special Leave Petitions, are taken up on each Monday and Friday and more than 90% of them are dismissed in limine. Hardly in10% cases notices are issued. One who has been practicing in the Supreme Court will say, without batting even eye lid, that it has literally been converted into to a Court of Appeal. Most of the SLPs are dismissed/admitted in less than two minutes of hearing. Some say that they are not decided but butchered.
There is not denying that with the rising number of cases the Supreme Court judges are overburdened. It does not mean that the people should be discouraged from filing the new cases. On the other hand, it is a good sign that people are becoming aware of getting their rights through the courts. Before deciding the fate of SLPs, the judges have to read at least the operative portions of the judgments of the High Courts or Tribunals. Even if four or five cases, on an average, are admitted by one court on each Monday and Friday they add up, at least, 100 cases to the docket every week. Only three days viz. Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday are left for hearing and deciding the earlier admitted cases. Some of the cases are heard for 2-3 days in row. Normally in Supreme Court a minimum of two judge bench sits in the Court. Many times three judge bench also hear the case. Thus only 11 or 12 benches effectively work on weekdays. It is, therefore, clear that the number of the cases, which are decided in a month is far less than the admitted cases resulting into back log.
The scope for settling the law, which is what is the primary responsibility of the Supreme Court, then goes to back burner. That is why, the demand for having four Courts of Appeal, in different parts of country, is gathering momentum. Once the task of deciding the SLPs goes to the Courts of Appeal; the Apex Court will be left for dealing exclusively with constitutional matters and finally settling the law, but this is easier said than done. The biggest impediment for having the Courts of Appeal is the Constitution itself where there is provision for only the High Courts and the Supreme Courts. Therefore, even if the Supreme Court decides for setting up the Courts of Appeal the Constitution of India will have to be amended.
I have two suggestions to make to reduce the burden of the Supreme Court even without having the Courts of Appeal. The first is the admission of SLPs can be left to the Registrars (Judicial), who could be retired High Court judges and their number could be enhanced to 20-25. They can sit on all five days to decide the admission of SLPs.
The cases of the Constitutional importance would then get the priority by the Supreme Court. The number of the judges on the constitutional bench should be not be less than seven or nine. It may be recalled here when the Supreme Court came in to existence there were only eight judges and their number was increased gradually by the Parliament, which at present is 31. In the beginning the Constitutional Bench was composed of five judges but now when the number of judges has already gone up and the constitutional issues are more complicated, it is better that it should be settled by larger benches. In this way the Supreme Court would be able to do justice with the cause for which it is meant.
The second suggestion is the maximum use of software technology. In most of the SLPs questions of law are not raised, they discuss more about the erroneous and perverse decisions of the High Courts based more on facts than on law. This can be largely weeded out by the artificial intelligence of the computer software, which can be specially developed for the purpose. Thus without incurring enormous amount of money for developing the infrastructures for Courts of Appeal in different parts of the country, the Supreme Court can be transformed to be immensely useful with the existing infrastructures by adding some facilities and judicious use of modern technology.

Welcome modification by the SC of its own judgement

Supreme Court of India has saved the country from major constitutional crisis by modifying its own order of 15^th May 2015 by which it had directed that the photographs of Minister, Chief Minister or Governor of the states would not be published or shown in the government advertisements.

The bench consisting of Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice P.C. Ghosh had ruled that it amounted to sheer misuse of public money for private publicity. This order had created a lot of problems for the Federal structure of the country, where the Governors and the Chief Ministers enjoy the equal constitutional rights.

Under Part VI of the Constitution of India, the rights of the Governors, Chief Ministers and the State Legislatures are clearly defined from Article 152 to Article 213 as it is provided for the Union Executive from Articles 52 to 122 in Part V. Similarly Articles 124 to 147 of Chapter IV deal with Union Judiciary, while Chapter V from 214 to 237 deal with the State Judiciary.

Thus duties, rights and responsibilities of the Union and the States are delineated in the Constitution. Needless to say, the High Courts do not function under the Supreme Court of India, as it has no supervisory powers over the High Courts. On the other hand, the High Courts have been vested with the supervisory powers over the subordinate courts of their respective jurisdictions under Article 227. The Supreme court enjoys supremacy because of certain reasons. Firstly; it is vested with powers under Article 141 whereby the law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts within the country. It is based on the principle of ‘stare decis’. Secondly; Article 142 provides the power to the Supreme Court to exercise its jurisdiction to render complete justice regardless of non-existence of any statutory provision. Thirdly; it is the highest Appellate Court, where the decisions of High Courts can be appealed to be upheld, set aside or modified. Fourthly; the President of India may consult it, at any time, on any question of law or the fact. This power is called the Power of Reference.

Although, it is like a consultation by the President of India from the Supreme Court yet the opinion expressed by the Supreme Court is binding on the President of India which literally means the Government of India. What is, however, the most outstanding power that is given by the Constitution to the Supreme court is Article 136, which provides vast discretionary power to grant special leave to appeal to any judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order in any cause or matter passed or made by any court or tribunal in the territory of India. Article 144 reinforces the authority of the Supreme Court which says all authorities civil and judicial in the territory of India shall act in its aid. Article 145 vests Supreme Court to frame its own rules. The writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 32 is similar to that of High Courts in Article 226. In fact, the High Courts have got winder powers under Article 226 for entertaining the petitions or issuing writs. The Supreme Court while passing any order in respect of the High Courts does not give direction but makes request, although in the legal parlances any request coming from the Supreme Court has all the force of orders.

Now let us come to the background of the case. This judgment of the Supreme Court was delivered in the context of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by a non-governmental organisation Common Cause for restricting the publication or broadcast of the photographs of the Ministers, Chief Ministers and the Governors at the cost of the public exchequer. The idea of Common Cause is certainly benign and laudable in the sense that public money should not be used for private publicity. Thus, the Supreme Court in its order of 15^th May 2015 said that except the photograph of President/Prime Minister and the Chief Justice of India, no other photographs could be published or telecast in the audio visual media. This order of the Supreme Court was fraught with dangers. Although it was a welcome decision with good intentions yet it raised many issues concerning the Centre- State relationships. It was the reason that many review petitions were filed by various State Governments and others. Finally, on 18^th of march 2016, the Supreme Court modified its order to the extent that the photograph of Chief Ministers Governors and Ministers of the Government can be published or shown along with Prime Minister, President and Chief Justice of India. Since the Supreme Court is the Apex Court, therefore, its order/decisions/directions can be modified only by itself. Be that as it may, it has come as a huge relief because now the stands settled by the correct interpretation of the Constitution. Hence, this historic modification in the judgement will help balance and strengthen the federal structure of the Country.

MECHANICAL JUSTICE IS TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE

The dismissal of a petition by the Madras High Court with observation that nowhere in the Indian Penal Code it is stated that ‘eating non-vegetarian food is an offence and there is no law touching, eating habits of any religion is an offence’ is very prosaic interpretation of law but certainly not conducive to the evolution of just, fare and judicious law. The famous legal philosopher Roscoe Pound was of the view that ‘law should be stable but not stand still’. In his famous book ‘An Introduction to Philosophy and Social Control Through Law’, he had said that ‘thinking about law one has to think about the society’.  In a civilised society people must be able to assume that those with whom they deal in the general intercourse of society will act in good faith and hence; (a) will make reasonable expectation which their promises or other conduct reasonably create; (b) will carry out their undertakings according to the expectations which the moral sentiment of the community attaches’. Thus it is clear where the society fails to follow the reasonable moral expectations, ‘the law which is in the words of Austin is the command of the Sovereign’ must come into the play.

The observation of the High Court came in the disposal of the petition filed by an Advocate by profession in the High Court of Madras praying that the Writ of Mandamus be issued to the authorities to prohibit the selling and eating of the beef around the Palani temple and its stairs. This temple is perched on the hills in the Dindigul district of Tamilnadu.  He has said in his petition that the entire circle of the Holy Hills is used as Giriwal Pathai (Parikrama). Hindu devotees go around Giriwal Pathai and they feel uncomfortable to cross the shops which are housed in the temple property and occupied by people belonging to other religion. They indiscriminately use beef and other non-vegetarian food by sitting in the stairs of Palani Hills and thus insult the religious faith of Hindus.

As a matter of fact, it is the responsibility of authorities particularly the Commissioner of the Municipality of the Palani and the Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Indouments to ensure that the area surrounding temple and sacred hills are not defiled.

Justices Shri S. Manikumar and Shri C.T. Selvam are right when they say that meat eating or even the buffalo meat, which is also known as beef is eating not prohibited in the Hindu religion. But there is no gainsaying that in and around all temples, non-vegetarian food is not allowed except, of course, in the ‘Shakt Temples’, where animal sacrifices are permitted. Thus the people belonging to other religion must be conscious towards the religious sentiments. Legally also Section – 153A of the IPC says ‘Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony’ – is punishable, and when it is read with Section 295 which says that ‘Whoever destroys, damages or defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by any class of persons with the intention of thereby insulting the religion of any class of persons or with the knowledge that any class of persons is likely to consider such destruction, damage or defilement as an insult to their religion, shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both’.Similarly Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code says that ‘Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of any class of citizens of India, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, insults or attempts to insult the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.’

Thus the ideal situation is that the provisions of Indian Penal Code are not required to be invoked but when in such situations demand, then there should not be any hesitation in invoking them. Here the High Court was certainly go beyond what are provided in the law and it should have done which could have helped in soothing the prayed tempers. The High Court has said that the petition is filed in the nature of a public interest litigation and which cannot be allowed to be misused by the meddlesome interloper or wayfarer or officious intervener without any interest or concern except for personal gain or private profit or other oblique consideration. But this case is certainly does not belong to the category of an interference by an interloper. This is a matter or an issue which has its bearing the sensitivities of millions of people who go to the temple round the year. Even those who do not go to temple they feel certainly hurt when they find that ‘people belong to other faith are eating and selling the meat in the vicinity of the temple, which is perched on the hills.

Even if, the petitioner not been able to provide any documentary evidence in support of his petition, at least considering the matter of great public importance the Hon’ble High Court must have asked for the factual report from the authorities concerned to pass the appropriate order in view of the reports received from them but by summarily rejecting the petition is absolutely no justice.