
News Topical, Digital Desk : The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a plea challenging the Karnataka government's decision to invite International Booker Prize winner Banu Mushtaq to inaugurate the Mysuru Dasara celebrations at the Chamundeshwari Temple.
In fact, this festival is going to start on September 22. During the hearing today on September 19, the bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, while dismissing the appeal, asked the petitioner's lawyer, “What is the preamble of this country? And how can the state differentiate between A, B, and C?”
SC upheld the High Court order
Let us tell you that in the appeal filed in the apex court, the order of the Karnataka High Court dated September 15 was challenged, in which the state's invitation to Mushtaq was upheld.
Petitioner H.S. Gaurav's lawyer told the court that he had no objection to the inauguration, calling it a secular activity. However, he objected to the events taking place inside the temple premises. He argued that this was not a purely secular activity. It took on a spiritual or religious overtones.
To this, the bench said, "This isn't a private event. The state is organizing it. How can the state differentiate between A, B, and C?" The court cited a Karnataka High Court order, which stated that one of the petitioners had shared the stage with Dr. Nisar Ahmed, who inaugurated the festival in 2017.
The petitioner gave these arguments
The petitioner's lawyer argued that the event consisted of two parts: an inauguration and a puja. He argued that the state's decision violated his rights under Article 25, which guarantees religious freedom. The bench asked why this issue was not raised in 2017.
The lawyer cited previous Supreme Court decisions and stated that they cannot interfere with his religious activities. Referring to the temple's activities, he said that under these circumstances, when the specific event is being staged, a ceremony and worship are being held within the temple premises, he is being made a part of a ceremony that he is completely separate from.
However, after hearing all the arguments, the bench dismissed the petition. Justice Nath emphasized, “We have said three times that this petition is dismissed.”
--Advertisement--