Achi news desk-
In response, the court said: “In our opinion, a mere statement that the first Hindu state will be established in Maharashtra is not in itself an appeal to votes on the basis of his religion but rather an expression, at best, of such a hope. . . However ridiculous such a statement is, it cannot be said to amount to an appeal to votes on the basis of his religion”.
In response to the judgment of then Chief Justice JS Verma, senior advocate AG Noorani wrote that “Verma’s sweeping expressions of disapproval are neither relevant nor effective. It is his ruling on the law and construction of the facts that is important. Both are patently, demonstrably wrong.”
He added: “Electoral candidates waste no time in expressing hopes to rouse the electorate. They know that its vote will be given against promises and commitments. ‘(The first Hindu Maharashtra) will be established’ is not an expression of hope but a pledge by a Shiv Sena leader in a meeting in a predominantly Hindu locality. If this Not a search for votes ‘on the basis of his religion’, what is it?”
This is a good question, and it remains unanswered.
An appeal against the Prabhoo and Joshi verdicts was filed in 2016. The petitioners said that the Hindutva “way of life” led to demands to silence and assimilate minorities, Dalits and Adivasis.
Their petition states, “Hindutva has become a sign of nationalism and citizenship. The interpretation has reduced the belief in secularism, which is the fundamental characteristic of the constitution.”
The challenge failed, with the Supreme Court refusing to hear it citing a procedural technicality, and the Hindutva rulings continue to give the RSS and BJP the leverage to push their agenda.
