Former Member of Planning Commission and Padmshree Awardee Files Implead Petition in The PIL, Against Forced Religious Conversions
(Judicial Quest News Network)
An Impleadment petition filed in the top court Padam Shree Awardee and former member of Planning Commission Dr.Syeda Hameed moved the Supreme Court seeking impleadment in a plea filed by BJP leader and Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay against forced and fraudulent religious conversion by intimidation, threatning, deceiving & luring through gifts and monetary benefits.
Earlier Hameed filed a petition in Supreme Court raising concerns over frequent and rising incidents of hate speeches.
In the present impleadment petition she submits that the forced religious conversion by intimidation, threatning, luring through monetary benefits is a serious problemand it violates Article 14, 21 and 25 of the Constitution of India.
She has categorized four classes of instances where individual is curtailed from excercing freedom of relgion and conscience.
- When hate Speech is Systematic and Widespread and Explicitly Targets Particular Relgions.
She submitted that each transgression by way of hateful speech causes harm to the targeted group, for the audience at these rallies already carries home a certain stigmatized impression about Muslims and encouragement to not interact with them socially and economically.
- Targetted Sexual Violence or Threats of Sexual Violence For Adhereing to Certain Beliefs for professing, Identifying with a religion.
She has further submitted that as has been seen in Kashmir, Punjab and North East, sexual violence, or threats therefore remain one of the most potent attacks on free agency and the right to profess/identity with a group.
It is further submitted that threats of sexual valance has recently been made on social Medias well as the public rallies.
- In the recent past two events organized in haridwar and in Delhi where the participants ahd openly issued statements decalring war against a section of the Indian Citizenry, the proclaimations made in those events are widely available on the internet and qualify both extreme hate speeches and as ‘vilant speeches inciting targeted kilings of Muslim citizens’.The content of these speeches are helping already prevailing discourse which seeks to reimagine the Indian Repub;ic as excluvist, and that has no space for other cultures, traditions and practices.
The petitioner further states that the discourse argues that Indian M<uslim and Hindu citizens have competiong interests, and for the latter to proper and achieve cultural self-realization, the nature of the Indian republic must be altered to that of a Hindu alone state.In its moderate form the disourse advocatyes an active social and economic boycott of Muslims, and in some cases physical annihilation.
- When Such Calls Are Made By Persons Holding Public Offices, Or By Persons In The Media With Widespread Following, Or Even In The State’s Response To The Same
The recent state response in filing of criminal cases against certain persons seen to be individually offering namaz in railway stations, or other public spaces, while not disturbing other forms of worship in public places is perceived as arbitrary and evokes both fear, and an inducement to hide personal religious convictions.
Certain media persons with large following have openly encouraged economic and social boycott based on religious identities.
This impleadment Application is drawn by Advocates Shahruk Alam, Shantanu Singh andfiled through AoR Akriti Chaubey.
