SC agrees to examine plea to repeal Bodh Gaya temple law
The Mahabodhi Temple Complex in Bihar's Bodh Gaya, a UNESCO World Heritage site, is one of the four holy areas related to the life of Lord Gautam Buddha.
Bodh Gaya is a place where Lord Buddha is believed to have attained enlightenment.
The plea, which has also challenged the validity of the 1949 Act, came up for hearing before a bench of Justices M M Sundresh and N Kotiswar Singh.
The petitioner's counsel said a plea with identical prayers was pending in the apex court.
The bench issued notice to the Centre and others seeking their responses on the petition and tagged it for hearing along with the pending plea.
The plea has sought to declare the 1949 Act as unconstitutional alleging it was "inconsistent" with Article 13 of the Constitution.
Article 13 relates to laws inconsistent with or in derogation of the fundamental rights.
The petition has also sought a direction to the authorities concerned to remove encroachments made in the premises of the Bodh Gaya temple for the exclusive worship of Buddhists around the world in order to manage, control and administer the religious, faith, belief and worship in the interest of justice.
On June 30, the apex court refused to entertain a separate plea challenging the vires of the 1949 Act and asked the petitioner to moved high court concerned.
The 1949 Act relates to the better management of the temple.
The Mahabodhi Temple Complex comprises a 50-metre high grand temple, the Vajrasana, the sacred Bodhi tree and six other sacred sites of Buddha's enlightenment, surrounded by numerous ancient votive stupas, well maintained and protected by inner, middle and outer circular boundaries.
A seventh sacred place, the Lotus Pond, is located outside the enclosure to the south. Both the temple area and the Lotus Pond are surrounded by circulating passages at two or three levels, and the area of the ensemble is 5 metres below the level of the surrounding land.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
24 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Rights group blames J&K Police for backlash against Kashmiris after Pahalgam attack
The Forum for Human Rights in J&K, an independent body co-chaired by former Supreme Court judge Justice Madan B. Lokur and former Kashmir interlocutor Radha Kumar, on Monday (August 4, 2025) blamed the Jammu & Kashmir Police's 'hasty and incorrect information for triggering hate speech and hateful actions against Kashmiris' after the Pahalgam terror attack. Releasing its annual report on human rights on the eve of the sixth anniversary of the abrogation of special provisions of Article 370 in Jammu & Kashmir, the forum noted that the police information that two of the terrorists were Kashmiris caused a backlash. 'It also created a permissive environment for hate speech and actions, as evidenced by trolling, arrests and illegal demolitions. By the time the NIA (National Investigation Agency) clarified the terrorists were all Pakistani, one month later, considerable damage had been done,' the report, J&K-Statehood for Human Rights, reads. The report said that mob hate spread to the extent that even the Foreign Secretary, Army and Air Force officers were trolled for a ceasefire. The forum alleged that there was no preventive action to stop the backlash. 'Though a backlash against Kashmiris and Muslims was widely anticipated, the Union Home Ministry did nothing to prevent it. By contrast, in 2010, the Union Home Ministry had issued an advisory to all police to act against harassment. Fortunately, Chief Minister Omar Abdullah had his ministers rush to other states to appeal to their chief ministers to protect Kashmiri residents, after which the backlash dwindled,' it said. The forum highlighted security lapse in preventing the Pahalgam terror attack, which left 26 civilians dead. 'The least that could have been done, issuing a general advisory warning residents and tourists in Jammu and Kashmir of a risk to crowded or tourist areas, was not done either,' it said. It pointed out the plight of border residents during 'Operation Sindoor'. 'Despite taking two weeks to respond militarily, little was done to evacuate civilians from the border areas, who were in any case facing incessant firing across the Line of Control from Pakistani troops (probably to facilitate the escape of the terrorists and infiltration by others),' the report said. The report said that the very large number of people were brought in for questioning – reportedly 2,800 – and the slapping of PSA and UAPA charges on over 100, 'were seen as collective punishment of the people for lapses of the Union Home Ministry and Lieutenant-Governor's administration'. The report claimed 'marginalization of the elected administration through imposition of the new Transaction of Business Rules issued shortly before the assembly election, which retained most powers in the hands of the Lieutenant-Governor, including over civil servants, the police, the Attorney-General and prosecutorial services. 'These rules nullify the rights of the people to representative and accountable governance,' it added.
Indian Express
24 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Bombay HC refuses to entertain autorickshaw drivers' plea against Rapido bike taxis
The Bombay High Court on Monday refused to entertain a plea by four autorickshaw drivers from Thane who claimed that bike taxis operated by aggregators, including Rapido, were operating illegally in the city using non-transport number plates. The petitioners claimed that it affected their right to livelihood. However, the judges orally remarked that presence of bike taxis did not infringe petitioners' fundamental right to livelihood, after which the petitioners withdrew their plea. The court granted the petitioners the liberty to approach the state government with a representation with their grievances. Last month, state Transport Minister Pratap Sarnaik had caught a Rapido Taxi plying illegally near Mantralaya junction after booking a ride on the app using random name to confirm public complaints about unauthorised bike taxi services A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Neela K Gokhale while hearing a plea by Amarjeet Rajnath Gupta and others questioned the petitioners as to how plying of auto rickshaws by aggregators affected their livelihood. The petitioners had claimed as per existing laws, only vehicles registered with the Regional Transport Office (RTO) as commercial vehicles bearing yellow number plates are allowed to operate bike taxis. The petitioners claimed that the vehicles that arrived after making booking on Rapido App were private or non-commercial vehicles and same violated fundamental rights of right to practice any profession and right to life and personal liberty of the Constitution 'This will stop only when you (autorickshaw drivers) stop refusing to take people. We have seen on the streets how taxi drivers and rickshaw drivers treat customers, their tone, their high-handedness. Each one of us has faced this,' the HC remarked. The bench added, 'So many taxis enter the market every year. Tomorrow, you will say taxi drivers should not ply at all, or that the Metro should not come at all. The government is competent to make decisions.' The government lawyer argued that action was being taken against illegally operating bike taxis. The court remarked that authorities shall take action if there are any illegalities. After the court's remarks, the petitioners sought leave from court to withdraw their plea, which the court accepted.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
38 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Green regulators can seek bank guarantees from polluters: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that environmental regulators, such as the Pollution Control Boards, can impose environmental compensation and seek bank guarantees from polluting entities as part of their preventive measures against potential environmental damage. 'We hold that the environmental regulators, the Pollution Control Boards, can impose and collect as restitutionary and compensatory damages fixed sums of money or require furnishing bank guarantees as an ex-ante measure towards potential environmental damage in exercise of powers under Sections 33A and 31A of the Water and Air Acts,' the Supreme Court said. A Bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Manoj Misra held that such actions by State Boards are lawful and fall within their powers. However, the Bench stressed that this authority must be exercised fairly and transparently. 'While we hold that the Boards have the power to direct the payment of environmental damages, we make it clear that this power must always be guided by two overarching principles. First, that the power cannot be exercised in an arbitrary manner; and second, the process of exercising this power must be infused with transparency,' the judgment said. The court emphasized that such action must be distinguished from a penalty. 'There is a distinction between a direction for payment of restitutionary and compensatory damages as a remedial measure for environmental damage or as an ex-ante measure towards potential environmental damage on the one hand; and a punitive action of fine or imprisonment for violations under Chapters VII of the Water Act and VI of the Air Act on the other hand.' The Bench also referred to the polluter pays principle in Indian environmental jurisprudence, stating that actual environmental degradation is not a prerequisite for demanding compensation. Instead, the potential for environmental harm is sufficient. 'The actual degradation of the environment is not a necessary condition for the application of the polluter pays principle, as long as the offending activities have the potential of degrading the environment," the judgment said. The Court also echoed the view taken by the National Green Tribunal in Swastik Ispat Pvt Ltd, where the tribunal had upheld the use of bank guarantees as a lawful method of securing environmental compliance. In the present case, the Delhi Pollution Control Committee had appealed against the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court, which had held that it was not empowered to levy compensatory damages under Section 33A of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, and Section 31A of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. The High Court ruled that such action amounted to a penalty under Chapters VII and VI of the respective Acts, and as such, the procedure for imposing and collecting compensatory damages outlined thereunder should be the only method available.
