SC stays HC’s ruling on Ayodhya title dispute

In an order, what could be seen as a great relief to a number of people across the country, the Supreme Court annulled the Allahabad High Court’s verdict on the Ayodhya Title suit. The Court stayed the Allahabad HC’s order for the tripartite division of the controversial Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land.

The Allahabad High Court on September 30 last year directed that the 2.77 acre disputed land would be divided into three parts among Hindus, Muslims and Nirmohi Akhara represented by Ram Lalla, Sunni Waqf Board and Nirmohi Akhara.

"There will be no change of situation at ground zero (the make-shift temple of Ram Lalla). The pooja will continue as per the January 7, 1993 order," senior advocate Ravi Shankar Prasad, who is representing Ram Lalla Virajman, told reporters after the Apex Court’s order.

After the demolition of the Masjid on December 6, 1992, the demonstrators created a makeshift temple. On January 7, 1993, the Congress government enacted the Ayodhya Act 1993 which preserved the status quo of the destroyed mosque and limited prayer on the disputed site.

What could be the outcomes now:

First, the Supreme Court may award use of the land to any one of the plaintiffs.

Secondly, the Supreme Court studies the HC judgment and concurs. But these two outcomes are more of statistical probabilities.

Third, the apex court may ask all parties, the Centre and the state government to maintain an indefinite status quo.

Or Fourth, the Apex Court upholding the spirit of a secular, inclusive and progressive nation, may de-link the disputed land from the politico-religious entities fighting for it.

Gujarat HC lifts ban on Jaswant’s Jinnah book

Banning the book “Jinnah: India-Partition-Independence” is a serious intrusion on fundamental rights of the citizens, the Gujarat High Court said on Friday ordering the government to lift the ban on the book written by expelled BJP leader Jaswant Singh.

The court also said the government had not read the book thoroughly and had not applied its mind in characterising the book as “against national interest” before imposing the ban.

The Gujarat government had proscribed the book in the state stating the contents of the book was “objectionable, misleading, and against public tranquillity”. The government had also claimed the book had misrepresented the image of Sardar patel and tried to tarnish his patriotic spirit. The book was banned for defamatory references to India’s first home minister, which was not acceptable to anyone, the government had said.

The state government had issued a notification under section 95 of the CrPC on August 19 banning Singh's book on the ground that it was against "national interest" and the contents were "misleading".

The HC, however, did not accept any of the government’s such contentions, but said the government could come out with fresh notifications in this regard, if it wanted.

The 71-year-old writer of the book, Jaswant Singh, welcomed the decision and said he was thrilled by the judgment. "It is a matter of satisfaction that the court has lifted the ban on the book, Singh said, adding the court had upheld freedom of speech.

Singh has also filed a separate case in the Supreme Court challenging the ban, which will be heard on September 8.

Within a couple of days of releasing the book, Jaswant Singh was expelled by BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) from the party on August 19 without seeking any clarification from him; on the pretext of eulogising Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, and making him custodian of secularism, and Nehru and Patel as the culprit of partition of India. The controversy surrounding the book, on the other hand, earned it good, zooming it to the top of the bestseller not only in India but also in Pakistan where Jinnah has the same respect as Gandhi in India.

MASSAGE by opposite sex not illegal: HC

People belonging to both genders, particularly who go to health spa for a massage by members of opposite sex, and the owner of health spa have no problems to use/ provide such facilities. The police, however, could inspect the spas and take appropriate action in accordance with law, if find there any illegality, but can not prohibit massages done by the opposite sex in spas.

The Madras High Court on Friday ruled that the city police do not have any legal right to interfere with such activities. Police, as on date, has no legal right to prevent a massage parlour being operated by any citizen of this country, even if it (massage) is done by persons belonging to the opposite sex.

Justice Chandru reading out the order cited judgments of the Supreme Court that the apex court and several high courts had on occasions interfered with police powers to prohibit dance shows in restaurants, video parlours running video games for youth and children, and women serving liquor in bars.

He, however, added that the police can inspect and take appropriate action in accordance with law in cases of any criminal activities prohibited by the law is carried out covertly in the name of spa centres.

The application in this regard was filed by Influence Lifestyle Stores Private Limited seeking to restrain the city police from interfering with its business.