'It will create Disharmony' SC junks plea to rename 1000 historical place on foreign invaders

SC rejects plea of Ashwini Upadhyay seeking direction to rename historical places named after past rulers

New Delhi:Supreme Court in its order on Monday rejected a PIL filed by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader and lawyer, Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay for directing the Centre to set up a 'Renaming Commission' to find out & restore the original names of historical, cultural & religious places which were changed by foreign invaders.

"Hinduism is not a religion but a way of life. Hinduism is a way of life and there is no bigotry in Hinduism. Don't dig up the past which will only create disharmony. Can't have the country on the boil," a bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice K M Joseph said, in its order today.

The Apex Court also observed that because of that we are able to live together. Divide and rule policy of British brought about schism in our society. Let us not being that back, Justice B V Nagarathna, the other judge in the bench told Upadhyay.

The BJP leader, Upadhyay had moved the Top court seeking renaming Comission to identify 1000 places renamed by foreign invaders.

The Apex Court questioned Upadhyay that there are thousands of roads named after Muslim prayers. "What do you want to achieve," the Apex Court asked him.

Upadhyay replied that this issue is related to right to restore the original names. 10 questions of law.

But the Supreme Court wanted to from Upadhyay as to which fundamental right of him (Upadhyay) being violated?

"Dignity, culture, right to religion, right to know," he replied.

Upadhyay pleaded to the Supreme Court that this is related to restoration of the names. Related matter has been referred to three judges. He cited and gave examples of Ramayana era names changed.

Upadhyay questioned that should names of cities be of those who looted destroyed due to whom our mothers committed suicides. He gave examples of names of roads etc in Delhi that do not reflect Krishna.

To this, the Supreme Court said that this is a completely different issue. Roads names nothing to do with places of religious worship, and rejected his petition.

"That is a fact of history can you wish it away. Yes we have been ruled by foreign invaders. We have been invaded several times and history has taken its part. What are you trying to achieve? Have we not heard other problems in our country. Should we not move ahead instead of back? Historical facts how can you," the Supreme Court said.

The Supreme Court observed that our country has so many places to attend to. You are relooking at the past selectively. India is a secular country. Your fingers being pointed at a particular community, termed barbaric. Do you want to keep the country under boil, and you direct a secular forum?(UNI)