LETTER: Random thoughts

Have just been through the new INSAF Bulletin (No 103, November, 2010).. Liked your (Vinod Mubayi’s) article on Shiv Sena.  The present generation needs to be reminded of the original motivations and the types of groups that formed the Sena- especially the fact that political patronage was given to them to counter the trade unions. Reminds one of Sanjay Gandhi’s buildup of Bhindranwale, to counter the Akalis.


The article on the Ayodhya verdict is extremely apt. However, I disagree that the Indian judiciary has been consistent to its legal role, in the past. In fact, cases of conflict concerning religious institutions have always been the Achilles Heel of the judiciary, the weakest link where the judges invariably fall in line with majoritarian or politically motivated sentiments. The old chestnut, Justice Gajendragadkar’s judgment declaring the Swaminarayans to be Hindus, so that they could enter temples, is a well known example, when the real issue, that of universal access to community institutions for all citizens, was sidestepped by the law.


The Indian judiciary has always followed a majoritarian trend in regard to religion vs law. In fact, it inherited this attitude from the colonial system, which avoided conflict with religious institutions in order to maintain status quo.


Dr. Yaaminey Mubayi

Culture and Community Development, 

New Delhi 110048

Tel: +91 11 64511248

Top - Home