Justice Shekhar Yadav’s Highly Objectionable Speech

How Justice Shekhar Yadav’s Remarks Undermine India’s Secular Constitution and Raise Concerns About Judicial Integrity

Justice Shekhar Yadav of the Allahabad High Court recently went to a function organized by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, and gave a highly objectionable, uncalled for, and silly speech stating that India has to be run according to the wishes of the majority, and that ‘gaay’ (cow), ganga (the Ganges river) and Geeta (the Bhagavad Geeta) was part of Indian culture.

Without naming any community, he said that the children in one community are taught kindness and non-violence and that people of this religion are tolerant, but in another religion, children couldn’t be expected to be tolerant given the fact that animals are slaughtered in front of them.

Expressing his hope of seeing a Uniform Civil Code soon, he mentioned that while the construction of the Ram Mandir took time, the UCC bill would take less time and would come into existence in no time.

“I assure you, you will see this (UCC) bill very soon. The day is not far when it will be clear that if there is one country, there should be one law, and one penal law. Those who try to deceive or run their own agendas will not last long.”

These statements raises serious concerns as it suggests that India, a country with a diverse population, should be ruled by the values of its largest community, the Hindus. However, India’s Constitution unequivocally declares the country to be secular, and this secularity is a cornerstone of its democratic framework.

The statement is not just a disregard for constitutional principles but also exposes a communal mindset that should be alarming for anyone committed to preserving India’s unity and pluralism.

Also Read: Keep the Communal Pot Boiling

Justice Yadav is not the only judge in India with such a communal mindset, and who have made such statements. Judges take an oath to uphold the Constitution, and the Indian Constitution proclaims India to be a secular country. So even though 80% of India’s population is Hindu, India cannot be legally called a Hindu country, unlike Pakistan whose Constitution says it is an Islamic State, and it cannot be legally run in accordance with the wishes of it’s majority.

A Judge has to be independent, neutral, impartial and unbiased. But how can Justice Yadav be so when he has revealed his communal bias in his speech?

It was highly improper for an Indian judge to attend a function organized by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, which is part of the ‘Sangh Parivaar’, and is an adjunct of the RSS, a body which is rabidly anti minority.

Years back I had criticised Supreme Court Justice Anil Dave for saying that Bhagavad Gita should be made compulsory in all schools in India

Similarly, there have been other instances that raise concerns about the impartiality of Indian judges in a diverse, pluralistic society. For example, former Chief Justice of India, Justice Chandrachud, invited Prime Minister Modi to perform Ganesh Puja at his residence, a move I strongly criticized in interviews with Kapil Sibal and Neelu Vyas.

Another alarming case involves Justice Abhijit Gangopadhyaya of the Calcutta High Court, who resigned from his position and later joined the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), even securing a ticket to contest a parliamentary seat. Such actions blur the lines between judicial independence and political allegiance, raising questions about the integrity of the judicial system in India.

I had explained in my interview by Kapil Sibal that diversity is the spirit and soul of India, and therefore a party like the BJP is anti-national, as its anti-minority ideology strikes at the very identity of India.

If India is converted into a Hindu, instead of a secular, state, it is bound to disintegrate.

Why should people living in north eastern states like Nagaland, Meghalaya, etc who are predominantly Christian, accept living as second-class citizens? Will they not secede from India?

Similarly, will not Kashmiris, who are mostly Muslims, do the same? Or the Sikhs, some of whom are already demanding Khalistan?

I regret to say that judges like Justice Shekhar Yadav are not only be untrue to their oath to uphold the Constitution, but are also contributing to the further disintegration and partition of India, like the one witnessed in 1947, which caused enormous horrible suffering, misery, and calamity to our people.

Also Read: Surveys of Mosques: Opening the Floodgates

 

Disclaimer : PunjabTodayNews.com and other platforms of the Punjab Today group strive to include views and opinions from across the entire spectrum, but by no means do we agree with everything we publish. Our efforts and editorial choices consistently underscore our authors’ right to the freedom of speech. However, it should be clear to all readers that individual authors are responsible for the information, ideas or opinions in their articles, and very often, these do not reflect the views of PunjabTodayNews.com or other platforms of the group. Punjab Today does not assume any responsibility or liability for the views of authors whose work appears here.

Punjab Today believes in serious, engaging, narrative journalism at a time when mainstream media houses seem to have given up on long-form writing and news television has blurred or altogether erased the lines between news and slapstick entertainment. We at Punjab Today believe that readers such as yourself appreciate cerebral journalism, and would like you to hold us against the best international industry standards. Brickbats are welcome even more than bouquets, though an occasional pat on the back is always encouraging. Good journalism can be a lifeline in these uncertain times worldwide. You can support us in myriad ways. To begin with, by spreading word about us and forwarding this reportage. Stay engaged.

— Team PT