Allowing Jharkhand Governor to take oath in the name of Allah is not correct

Manasa Devi Temple, Haridwar

Your Vote Please

Do you think that the Supreme Court was right in permitting Jharkhand Governor to take oath of office in the name of Lord Allah?

See results without voting

Allowing Jharkhand Governor to take oath in the name of Allah is not correct

Allowing Jharkhand Governor to take oath in the name of Allah is not correct
Allowing Jharkhand Governor to take oath in the name of Allah is not correct | Source

Allowing Jharkhand Governor to take oath in the name of Allah is not correct


Jharkhand Governor insists on taking oath in the name of Allah

Governors are appointed by the Central government for different States in India. These Governors take oath in the name of God and assume power. The oath taking is administered by the Chief Justice of the High Court in the relevant State. This practice has been followed by all the Governors right from 1950 when India was declared a Republic. But the Jharkhand Governor broke this convention when he took oath in the name of Allah and not God.

Will Supreme Court allow oath taking in the name of Hindu Gods and Goddesses?

This act was challenged in the Court and the Supreme Court of India has upheld the Governor’s act as correct. The Court found nothing wrong in this practice. Now this judgement will open up the Pandora’s Box. If BJP comes to power in the next general election, it will be appointing its party members as Governors of many States. These Governors, being trained by the RSS, could insist on taking oath in the names of Hindu Gods and Goddesses. Some may take oath in the names of Lord Balaji, Saraswathi, Lord Ganesh, Lord Shiva, Lord Vishnu, Lord Krishna, Lord Rama, Lord Brahma and many other Gods and Goddesses. There are plenty of Gods and Goddesses in the Hindu religion.

Bal Thackeray was punished, but Periar was spared

Will the Supreme Court allow the BJP Governors to take oath in the names of Hindu Gods and Goddesses? It has to allow them. If it refuses to do so, it will be discriminating between religions. If it allows them to take oath in the name of any God or Goddess, it will make a mockery of the Constitution and the Office of the Governor. There are also people in Hindu religion who worship sun, moon, planets, rivers, oceans, animals including snake and nature. There are snake temples in some places. Devotees feed milk to snakes in such temples to fulfil a vow. Tomorrow if a Hindu Governor insists that he will take oath in the name of snake, will the Supreme Court allow it? If it does not allow, will it not be a discriminatory practice, granting a favour to one religion and denying it to another religion? Already there is an allegation that the judiciary is discriminating between the Hindus and the Muslims. For example, the Supreme Court confiscated the electoral franchise from the Shiv Sena leader Bal Thackeray for his statement against the Muslims. But the same Supreme Court kept silent when the DK leader E V Ramasamy Naicker (called Periar by his followers) garlanded a Lord Ram statue with chappals in Tamil Nadu and insulted the Hindus. The Supreme court did not confiscate the electoral franchise of Periar for his action whereas Bal Thackeray was punished.

Will the court permit a Governor to take oath in the name of a snake?

If the Supreme Court refuses permission for a Governor to take oath of office in the name of snake or sun or planets, then the Supreme Court will have to draw a negative list of Gods and Goddesses in whose names oaths cannot be taken. This negative list will keep on growing in future as there are millions of Gods and Goddesses in the vast Hindu religion. Even the same God is called by different names by different people residing in different areas. Lord Shiva was supposed to have only two sons – Ganesh and Karthik, but in Haridwar, we have a Manasa Devi temple which hosts the Goddess Manasa Devi, the supposed daughter of Shiva and Parvathi. While many people believe that Lord Shiva had only two sons, some people also believe that he had a daughter Manasa Devi. Now if a Governor insists on taking oath in the name of Goddess Manasa Devi, what will be the attitude of the Supreme Court? Will it rule that Manasa Devi was indeed a daughter of Lord Shiva or will it reject the claim?

Wisdom and sagacity lacking among the judges

The Supreme Court in the past was filled up by judges of intellect and calibre. They took decisions after deep thought. Today, that sagacity and wisdom is lacking among the Supreme Court judges. That is why they give out judgements without considering the future repercussions of their actions. The judges could have rejected the request of the Jharkhand Governor to take oath in the name of Allah and directed him to take oath in the name of God. No Muslim will get offended if he or she is asked to take the oath in the name of God. This is because ‘God’ is a generic expression and does not denote any particular name or religion. Now the Supreme Court judgement has opened way for some sort of heroism by the BJP members in future, quoting the precedence of the Jharkhand Governor’s oath taking in the name of Lord Allah. Will wisdom ever return to the Supreme Court in future?

More by this Author

  • Symphony Dominates Air Cooler Market
    0

    Air coolers are best suited to people living in the interior away from the sea. For those who live within fifty kilometres of sea coast, air coolers are difficult to maintain and they should opt for air conditioners....


Comments

No comments yet.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working