Really different laws on the basis of religious could divert the development path of nation, so Govt. should implement UCC as soon as possible.
See in the USA, Evanlgelist Christianity says in strict terms. ' refugee being a suppliant' cannot be rejected under Bible; so Mr Trump though he is an Evagelist Christian ought to follow his own sect of christianity; else he would be excommunicated as a christian terrorist says a priest; even Prof Rossa B of Georgetown University said the other day, he can be impeached under four rules why in the very USA people just oppose him need to be noted; why even frr President Mr. Obama said people should revolt Trumps 'Travel ban' why one needs to appreciate, when it is said in a most advanced country of the world, where any outworn creed or outworn ideas cannot exit is the precursor for the hon USSC to duly interpret the American Constitution, as Apex court by its very nomenclature , it has to review the constitution tenets while giving credence to 25th Amendment too; when so same logic applies to Indian SC to not to be bogged down by so called judicial restraint ' as such in the matter i discussed earlier.
If you allow 'Jallikattu' you allow, 'cruelty on animals you if allowed on bulls, people would under facade say under their God forsaken custom 'killing of Buffellow is permitted in their custom or culture; so another set would say allow 'human sacrifices, would you allow, if done there is 'Natural Justice ' under Art 14. so r/w Art 13/3, even by reviving the art 13, as in Keshavanada Bharati case the 13 member bench revived the Art 13; to make it more effective, let another new bench of 15 judges resurrect Art 13 completely, if it means declaring 'ultra vires' some constitutional amendments or partially using the doctrine of severability' of certain clauses would be sensible judicial activism is my considered view.
Agreeing ti the view of the paper, but my take is, when the preamble is, Secular - vital component of the Indian Constitution, under that only we allowed inter-caste marriages, as also inter religious marriages, when so,Art 13(3) is vital fr the secular welfare of India as such since India is a multi-cultural, multi-customs originated time immemorial, so judicial reviews ought to be away from any statute, besides we per se Art 372(3) allowed British legislations too as viable one, in the situation, I agree with Justice Kuldip Singh view in Vallottam v UOI(1995), as we have to strictly go by civilized methods of the day ..so scrap any custom and culture if against 'humanity ' as such must be scraped forthwith, to give some stability in appreciating the values given by modern times; else, you will allow under custom some one to marry 4 women, some one woman, but women are treated as slaves that cannot be tolerated under Secular laws, no human can say that women don't fall under 'human' but fall under 'animals'. so Court must be active not work on any such type of constraint as such, as is shown in the judgements now here cited; politics cannot play on for men one law and women another law, that wyt the politicians hands must be tied by a judicial activism, that will just settle the issue once and for all; after all Constitution is no where says 'politicians' can change basic tenets of the constitution, even if it were to affect its prospects as political party as such.
You need to be
logged in to post comment
You can also submit your article by sending to firstname.lastname@example.org
view more »
Our Network Sites
Join LAWyersclubindia.com and Share your Knowledge. Registered members get a chance to interact at Forum, Ask Query, Comment etc.