By PTI
NEW DELHI: The Centre raised questions within the Supreme Court on Monday over the locus standi of activist Teesta Setalwad’s NGO, “Citizens for Justice and Peace”, in difficult controversial state legal guidelines regulating spiritual conversions resulting from interfaith marriages.
Alleging that the NGO permits its title for use “at the behest of some selected political interest”, the Union of India informed the highest courtroom that it’s responsible of gathering enormous funds by exploiting the agonies of riot-affected individuals.
“I state and submit that the petitioner herein purports to act in public interest, in which it selectively takes up public causes for the objects and intents other than public interest. I respectfully submit that from a series of judicial proceedings, it is now established that the petitioner no.1 allows its name to be used through its two office-bearers at the behest of some selected political interest and also earns out of such activity,” an affidavit filed by Brahma Shankar, Joint Secretary within the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), stated.
The Centre submitted that it has filed a preliminary affidavit just for the restricted function of opposing the grant of any equitable or different aid below Article 32 of the Constitution on the behest of the petitioner.
“I respectfully submit that it’s a settled place of legislation that the background and credentials of the petitioner can be essentially the most related consideration for a constitutional courtroom to resolve whether or not to entrust such a petitioner with a writ of the constitutional courtroom or to resolve whether or not to invoke the jurisdiction vested within the highest constitutional courtroom on the behest of the petitioner, whose credentials are in critical doubt.
“I respectfully submit that under the guise of serving public interest, the petitioner deliberately undertakes, and consciously and surreptitiously espouses, divisive politics in an attempt to divide the society on religious and communal lines,” the affidavit acknowledged.
ALSO READ | In BJP dominated Uttarakhand, Assembly passes anti-conversion & girls’s reservation invoice
It alleged related actions of the petitioner organisation in different states and stated at present, this sort of exercise is occurring in Assam.
“I respectfully state and submit that the prayers made in the instant petition are made in other petitions also, which will be examined by this court, subject to hearing all necessary and affected parties. If the petitioner is bona fide contesting the present petition purely in public interest, it cannot have any objection if the same issue is gone into by this court in other proceedings.”
“I state and submit that the present petition at the behest of the petitioner organisation may be dismissed only on the ground of locus. The present affidavit is bona fide and in the interest of justice,” it stated.
The apex courtroom had, on January 6, 2021, agreed to look at sure new and controversial legal guidelines of Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand regulating spiritual conversions resulting from interfaith marriages.
The Uttar Pradesh legislation pertains to not solely interfaith marriages however all spiritual conversions and lays down elaborate procedures for anybody who needs to transform to a different faith.
The Uttarakhand legislation entails a two-year jail time period for these discovered responsible of non secular conversion by means of “force or allurement”.
The allurement might be within the type of money, employment or materials advantages.
The plea filed by the NGO has alleged that these legislations violate articles 21 and 25 of the Constitution as these empower the State to suppress a person’s private liberty and freedom to practise the faith of his alternative.
NEW DELHI: The Centre raised questions within the Supreme Court on Monday over the locus standi of activist Teesta Setalwad’s NGO, “Citizens for Justice and Peace”, in difficult controversial state legal guidelines regulating spiritual conversions resulting from interfaith marriages.
Alleging that the NGO permits its title for use “at the behest of some selected political interest”, the Union of India informed the highest courtroom that it’s responsible of gathering enormous funds by exploiting the agonies of riot-affected individuals.
“I state and submit that the petitioner herein purports to act in public interest, in which it selectively takes up public causes for the objects and intents other than public interest. I respectfully submit that from a series of judicial proceedings, it is now established that the petitioner no.1 allows its name to be used through its two office-bearers at the behest of some selected political interest and also earns out of such activity,” an affidavit filed by Brahma Shankar, Joint Secretary within the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), stated.
The Centre submitted that it has filed a preliminary affidavit just for the restricted function of opposing the grant of any equitable or different aid below Article 32 of the Constitution on the behest of the petitioner.
“I respectfully submit that it’s a settled place of legislation that the background and credentials of the petitioner can be essentially the most related consideration for a constitutional courtroom to resolve whether or not to entrust such a petitioner with a writ of the constitutional courtroom or to resolve whether or not to invoke the jurisdiction vested within the highest constitutional courtroom on the behest of the petitioner, whose credentials are in critical doubt.
“I respectfully submit that under the guise of serving public interest, the petitioner deliberately undertakes, and consciously and surreptitiously espouses, divisive politics in an attempt to divide the society on religious and communal lines,” the affidavit acknowledged.
ALSO READ | In BJP dominated Uttarakhand, Assembly passes anti-conversion & girls’s reservation invoice
It alleged related actions of the petitioner organisation in different states and stated at present, this sort of exercise is occurring in Assam.
“I respectfully state and submit that the prayers made in the instant petition are made in other petitions also, which will be examined by this court, subject to hearing all necessary and affected parties. If the petitioner is bona fide contesting the present petition purely in public interest, it cannot have any objection if the same issue is gone into by this court in other proceedings.”
“I state and submit that the present petition at the behest of the petitioner organisation may be dismissed only on the ground of locus. The present affidavit is bona fide and in the interest of justice,” it stated.
The apex courtroom had, on January 6, 2021, agreed to look at sure new and controversial legal guidelines of Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand regulating spiritual conversions resulting from interfaith marriages.
The Uttar Pradesh legislation pertains to not solely interfaith marriages however all spiritual conversions and lays down elaborate procedures for anybody who needs to transform to a different faith.
The Uttarakhand legislation entails a two-year jail time period for these discovered responsible of non secular conversion by means of “force or allurement”.
The allurement might be within the type of money, employment or materials advantages.
The plea filed by the NGO has alleged that these legislations violate articles 21 and 25 of the Constitution as these empower the State to suppress a person’s private liberty and freedom to practise the faith of his alternative.
