
Hindu religious leaders condemn Allahabad HC remark that Puranas written on hearsay
In its order dated May 23, a bench of Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, while hearing a petition that pleaded to make Hindu goddess Radha a joint holder of the disputed Krishna Janambhoomi property, said that the reference given by the petitioner is based on something written in the Puranas and Samhitas wherein Shriji Radha Rani is considered as soul of Lord Krishna.
'The Pauranic illustrations are generally considered as hearsay evidence in legal context. In the case of Pauranic illustrations, these are graphic representations of stories and events and the truth of events they depict is usually based on narrative and not on direct observation or testimony. There is no evidence in support of the claim raised by the applicant that the applicant is entitled as a joint holder of said land of 13.37 acres, and the property of the applicant is also involved in suit property claimed by the plaintiff No. 1 as the birthplace of Lord Krishna,' the court said.
'Ignorance'
Reacting to the court's remarks, Avi Mukteshwaranand Saraswati, Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath, said that the remarks made by the judge shows his ignorance on the religion.
'The judge must remember the Ram Janambhoomi case in which the Supreme Court has accepted the statements written in Skanda Puran and other religious texts of the Hindu religion and gave the property to Ram Lalla,' said the Shankaracharya in a video message.
He added that the legal system in India, as per the past orders of the Supreme Court, has to accept the Hindu religious texts when the matter is related to Hindu rights and structures.
'Puranas are scientific'
Speaking to the media, Kailashanand Giri, Mahamandaleshwar of Niranjani, also criticised the HC's remarks and said that Puranas are completely authenticated and scientific.
'The judge has the full right to decide based on his discretion, but he also has the responsibility to maintain the trust of the people. He said that we believe in God only on the basis of what is written in the Puranas. He said that we believe in God only on the basis of what is written in the Puranas. We see the form of Lord Ram and Krishna through it,' he added.
Jitendranand Saraswati, general secretary of Akhil Bhartiya Sant Samiti, said that every scripture of Sanatan Dharma including the character of Lord Ram has been termed as 'myth' by the people in the past but they were proven wrong.
'Shrimad Bhagwat Mahapuran and Gita both are part of the Mahabharat. We cannot say that they were written on hearsay. The HC has said something like this it should reconsider its view,' he added.
Slamming the High Court, the Mahamandaleshwar of Juna Akhara, Swami Yatindranand Giri said that in a religious dispute, such religious texts are quoted while pointing out that 'Puranas', 'Vedas' and 'Upanishad' are the 'granths'. He also said that courts must think twice before hurting the religious sentiments of people.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)

Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
US SC clears way for deportation of several immigrants to South Sudan
The majority halted an order that had allowed immigrants to challenge any removals to countries outside their homeland where they could be in danger AP Washington The Supreme Court on Thursday cleared the way for the deportation of several immigrants who were put on a flight in May bound for South Sudan, a war-ravaged country where they have no ties. The decision comes after the justices found that immigration officials can quickly deport people to third countries. The majority halted an order that had allowed immigrants to challenge any removals to countries outside their homeland where they could be in danger. The court's latest order makes clear that the South Sudan flight detoured weeks ago can now complete the trip. It reverses findings from federal Judge Brian Murphy in Massachusetts, who said his order on those migrants still stands even after the court lifted his broader decision. The Trump administration has called the judge's finding a lawless act of defiance. Attorneys for the eight migrants have said they could face imprisonment, torture and even death if sent to South Sudan, where escalating political tensions have threatened to devolve into another civil war. The push comes amid a sweeping immigration crackdown by Trump's Republican administration, which has pledged to deport millions of people who are living in the United States illegally. Authorities have reached agreements with other countries to house immigrants if authorities can't quickly send them back to their homelands. The eight men sent to South Sudan in May had been convicted of serious crimes in the US. Murphy, who was nominated by Democratic President Joe Biden, didn't prohibit deportations to third countries. But he found migrants must have a real chance to argue they could be in danger of torture if sent to another country. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
&w=3840&q=100)

First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
US Supreme Court approves deportation of 8 migrants to South Sudan
The decision by the conservative-dominated top court comes 10 days after it cleared the way for the Trump administration to deport migrants to countries that are not their own read more Journalists sit outside the US Supreme Court in Washington, DC, on June 27, 2025. AFP Photo The US Supreme Court on Thursday gave the green light for the Trump administration to deport a group of migrants stranded at an American military base in Djibouti to war-torn South Sudan. The decision by the conservative-dominated top court comes 10 days after it cleared the way for the Trump administration to deport migrants to countries that are not their own. The eight migrants were being flown to South Sudan from the US in May but ended up in Djibouti when a district court imposed a stay on third-country deportations. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The court said migrants were not being given a 'meaningful opportunity' to contest removal. On June 23, the Supreme Court lifted the stay imposed by District Judge Brian Murphy, clearing the way for third-country deportations. But Murphy, an appointee of former president Joe Biden, said the case of the eight migrants who ended up in Djibouti was subject to a separate stay order he issued that had not been addressed by the Supreme Court. On Thursday, the Supreme Court said its June 23 decision applied to both of the judge's orders. Liberal justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented from the decision. 'What the Government wants to do, concretely, is send the eight noncitizens it illegally removed from the United States from Djibouti to South Sudan, where they will be turned over to the local authorities without regard for the likelihood that they will face torture or death,' Sotomayor said. 'Today's order clarifies only one thing: Other litigants must follow the rules, but the administration has the Supreme Court on speed dial,' she said. The US authorities have said that the eight men – two from Myanmar, two from Cuba, and one each from Vietnam, Laos, Mexico and South Sudan – are convicted violent criminals. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The Trump administration has defended third-country deportations as necessary since the home nations of some of those who are targeted for removal sometimes refuse to accept them. Donald Trump campaigned for president promising to expel millions of undocumented migrants from the United States, and he has taken a number of actions aimed at speeding up deportations since returning to the White House in January.


Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Today in Politics: What the special revision of electoral rolls means in Bihar
As per the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls ordered by the Election Commission ahead of the Bihar Assembly polls, residents of Bihar whose names did not figure in the 2003 electoral rolls must provide one of 11 documents notified by the EC to prove their 'citizenship'. But when The Indian Express visits Bihar, many do not have these documents. This story plays out in village after village in the state, from Nitish's turf Harnaut in Nalanda district, to RJD chief Lalu Prasad's Raghopur in Vaishali. The Raghopur Assembly seat is currently represented by Lalu's son and senior RJD leader Tejashwi Prasad Yadav. In the next 20 days or so, as the monsoon moves in, over 77,000 booth level offices along with other government staff and political party workers must check the antecedents of over 7.8 crore registered electors as part of the revision exercise. While a declaration that an applicant is a citizen is required for all new registrations, this time the EC is asking for citizenship proof for all new as well as existing voters. Across villages in Bihar, this has meant both disquiet and a desperate scramble for residential and caste certificates, the most commonly available of the 11 documents specified by the EC. RSS pitch RSS general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale last week said that the words 'secular' and 'socialist' in the Preamble to the Constitution should be reviewed. This is not the first time the issue has come up. BJP Rajya Sabha MP Rakesh Sinha moved a Private Member's Bill in 2020, and others have petitioned the courts. The Supreme Court examined the matter, and in 2024, a two-judge Bench led by then Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjeev Khanna upheld the insertion of 'socialist' and 'secular' in the Preamble. The timing of the Sangh's move today is of as much interest as the move itself. After the fulfilment of its core agenda — Ram temple, Article 370, Uniform Civil Code — the Sangh may want to push its agenda further in its centenary year as it looks to create a Hindu civilisational entity. The RSS's suggestion can complicate an already difficult situation for the BJP brass. First, the party will have to decide what it will do about the allegiance to secularism that is mentioned in its party Constitution. In 2014, PM Modi said that secularism 'flows in our blood'. Second, the BJP's NDA allies, on whom the party is dependent in its third term, are not likely to bite the bullet easily. Lok Janshakti Party (Ram Vilas) leader Chirag Paswan has already made it clear he is not in favour of amending the Preamble. Third, it will give another handle to the Congress to target the BJP. Neerja Chowdhury unpacks in her column Majithia's bail plea On Friday, the Punjab and Haryana High Court will hear Shiromani Akali Dal leader Bikram Singh Majithia's plea against his arrest and subsequent remand in a disproportionate assets case registered against him by the Vigilance Bureau. Majithia was sent to a seven-day vigilance remand by the Mohali court on June 26. The court Wednesday extended the remand by four more days after his seven-day remand ended. The VB on June 25 arrested Majithia in the case allegedly involving laundering of Rs 540 crore of 'drug money'. Majithia on July 1 moved the high court, calling the arrest 'political witch-hunting and vendetta' for being a vocal critic of the current dispensation. In his petition, he sought appropriate relief against 'illegal' arrest and subsequent remand granted in the FIR registered under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He submitted that the FIR registered against him is 'patently illegal' while his arrest was carried out in 'gross violation of settled legal procedures'. In 2021, Majithia was booked under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act. The action was taken on the basis of a 2018 report of the anti-drug Special Task Force. Majithia spent more than five months in Patiala jail and walked out of prison in August 2022 after the Punjab and Haryana High Court granted him bail. – With PTI inputs