“How the Supreme Court handled religious remarks differently in Nupur Sharma & Swami Prasad Maurya cases”, The Commune Mag, January 26, 2024:
“The recent proceedings in the Supreme Court have shed light on the varying approaches taken by the judiciary when dealing with alleged religious offenses, particularly remarks made by public figures. In two distinct cases involving Samajwadi Party leader Swami Prasad Maurya and political spokesperson Nupur Sharma, the court’s responses reflect the complexity of interpreting religious sentiments and the delicate balance between freedom of expression and maintaining communal harmony.
Swami Prasad Maurya found himself in legal turmoil over alleged remarks made about Tulsidas’ Ramcharitmanas. The Supreme Court, during the hearing, raised questions about the state government’s sensitivity, emphasizing the matter’s interpretational nature. Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta highlighted that the issue revolved around interpretation, questioning whether it amounted to an offense.
The government’s argument, attempting to dissuade the court from staying criminal proceedings, faced resistance. Justice Mehta asserted that burning copies of the text could not be attributed to Maurya, emphasizing the importance of recognizing diverse perspectives. Eventually, the court issued notice for a four-week returnable period, staying the proceedings. However, the Allahabad High Court had earlier found prima facie grounds against Maurya, expressing concerns about incitement to rebellion and potential damage to communal harmony…..”
Read the full article at Thecommunemag.com