Crime Today News
The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a public interest litigation petition seeking to include the name of Hindutva ideologue VD Savarkar in the schedule of the 1950 Emblems and Names Prevention of Improper Use Act to prevent its misuse, Live Law reported.
The Act was formulated to prevent the improper use of certain emblems and names for professional and commercial purposes.
A bench of Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih was hearing a petition alleging that Congress leader Rahul Gandhi was violating fundamental duties by making remarks about Savarkar.
During the hearing, the petitioner told the court that he had been researching Savarkar for 30 years and wanted to “establish certain facts” about the Hindutva ideologue in a legally verifiable manner, Bar and Bench reported.
He requested the court to issue directions to the Lok Sabha speaker to include Savarkar in the schedule to the Emblems and Names Prevention of Improper Use Act, Bar and Bench reported.
The petitioner argued that Gandhi, who is the leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, cannot impede his fundamental duties.
In response, the court asked the petitioner: “What is your fundamental right violation in this?”
The court said that it did not find any grounds to intervene and that it cannot entertain “writs like this”.
The bench also said that a petition under Article 32 would be entertained only if there was a violation of fundamental rights, PTI reported.
Article 32 grants the right to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of fundamental rights.
The bench added that the petitioner needed to make a representation to the Union government if he wanted to include something about Savarkar in the curriculum. In response, the petitioner told the court that he had already submitted such a representation.
In a separate defamation case, the Supreme Court had on April 25 criticised Gandhi for his “irresponsible” remarks about Savarkar, PTI reported. The Congress leader had claimed that the Hindutva ideologue was a collaborator with the British and received a pension from them.
The Supreme Court had said that it would initiate suo motu action if the Congress leader repeated the statement.
The court, however, had stayed the criminal proceedings against Gandhi in the defamation suit.
This article first appeared on Scroll.in
📰 Crime Today News is proudly sponsored by DRYFRUIT & CO – A Brand by eFabby Global LLC
Design & Developed by Yes Mom Hosting
