New Delhi: The writ submitted by the extremist organisation; Hindu Dharma Parishad against Christian missionaries was rejected by the Supreme Court. The organisation demanded monitoring activities of the Christian missionaries. The court warned that in future if such complaints were raised, fines will be imposed.
The Hindu Dharma Parishad approached the Madras High Court with the same demand last year, which was also rejected. The writ was further taken to the Supreme Court. The verdict was welcomed by Jesuit priest Fr Cedric Prakash.
In an interview with the UCA news, Fr Cedric added that the rights of all citizens especially those belonging to religious minorities and their constitutional rights are to be guaranteed and protected by the legal system and the government.
The complaint is a direct violation of Article 25 of the Indian Constitution which assures freedom to every citizen in embracing and propagating the religion one choses. The Indian legal system and Criminal Law Enforcement include sufficient clauses to monitor any person, or organisation that misuses religion and prevents such misuse.
Fr Cedric observed that organisations like the Hindu Dharma Parishad aims to destroy the religious harmony in the country and cause division by spreading false propaganda against minorities.
In its verdict concerning this case, the Madras High Court said that there were rules in place to prevent forced religious conversations. The organisation approached the Supreme Court questioning the lower court’s verdict.
The writ was alleged to ensure the supreme authority and stability of India, by putting under observation the financial gains and activities of Christian missionaries. It was alleged that due to lack of watchfulness, the Christian missionaries were using the funds raised by them to form the so called non-governmental organisations (NGO), and also, hundreds of religious minority trusts.
It was further alleged that these trusts were receiving huge amounts of money from overseas. The money so collected was being used for anti-social activities and to instigate innocent people in sabotaging peace in the country. The Supreme Court dismissed the writ citing that there was no truth in the allegations and warned that such writs will warrant fines in the future.
-transl. JD