|
New Delhi: A judge's remarks about the location of a shipping canal project touched off a brief exchange in the apex court yesterday.
The exchanges took place as the bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan and justice R.V. Raveendran questioned petitioner Subramanian Swamy's suggestions that "millions of Hindus worship Ram Sethu".
Swamy made the statement while arguing that the apex court must not suspend its order which had banned last year the dredging of the Adam's Bridge or the Ram Sethu to build a sea route between India and Sri Lanka.
"It is an admitted fact that millions of Hindus worship Ram Sethu," Swamy said. This provoked justice Raveendran to ask: "Who has gone there to worship?"
And Chief Justice Balakrishnan added: "You cannot say that the people go there to worship as this is under the sea."
These remarks by the bench appeared to upset Swamy and counsel for various other petitioners, who raised their voice in unison and said: "It's an admitted fact that Ram Sethu is regarded as a religious place and millions of Hindus go to Rameswaram to worship it."
Perception
"It's the belief of the people of the country and the court cannot say that it's not a place of worship," Swamy said.
The chief justice replied: "We do not say that it's not a sacred place. It's one's perception."
But Swamy said: "It's not a perception. It's an admitted fact that Hindus regard it as a place of worship."
The Sethusamudram project involves dredging a ship channel across the Palk straits between India and Sri Lanka. The project will allow ships sailing between the east and west coasts of India to have a shorter passage instead of having to go round Sri Lanka.
This will help save up to 424 nautical miles (780km) and up to 30 hours in sailing time.
A number of organisations have opposed the project, saying it would destroy the mythological bridge believed to have been used by Hindu deity Ram and his army, going by the epic Ramayana.
Earlier, Swamy recalled that the Madras High Court had asked the central government to file an affidavit stating whether any study has been conducted to ascertain whether Ram Sethu could be declared a national monument.
But last year, when the Supreme Court transferred to itself from the Madras High Court all the lawsuits opposed to Sethusamudram project, it had not stayed the high court's order, said Swamy.
He sought the apex court's direction to the government to comply with the high court order.
|
