Haji Ali Dargah decides to grant access to women, finally

October 24, 2016

New Delhi, Oct 24: Women will be granted access to the sanctum sanctorum of the Haji Ali shrine in Mumbai on par with men, the Dargah Trust told the Supreme Court today and sought four weeks to make the requisite infrastructural changes.

haji aliA bench comprising Chief Justice T S Thakur and Justices D Y Chandrachud and L Nageswara Rao granted time to the trust and disposed off its appeal against the Bombay High Court order asking it to give equal access to women also.

Senior advocate Gopal Subramanium, appearing for the trust, said an additional affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Dargah trust saying it is willing to allow women inside the shrine.

The apex court, on October 17, had extended the stay granted by Bombay High Court to facilitate an appeal against its decision to lift the ban on entry of women near the sanctum sanctorum of the Dargah in Mumbai.

Earlier, the Supreme Court had expressed hope that the Trust, which had challenged the high court judgement, "will take a stand which is progressive".

Subramanium, had also assured the bench that he was on a "progressive mission" and said all holy books and scriptures promoted equality and nothing which is regressive in character should be suggested.

The bench had also remarked that "if you are not allowing both men and women to go beyond a point, there is no problem. But if you are allowing some to go beyond a point while others are not, it is a problem."

The counsel, appearing for a women's group which has challenged the practice of the Trust not to allow women near the sanctum sanctorum, had submitted that the position was different before 2011 than what it is today.

The Trust moved the apex court challenging the Bombay High Court order lifting the ban on women from entering the sanctum sanctorum of the renowned Muslim shrine in South Mumbai.

The High Court on August 26 had held that the ban imposed by the Trust on women from entering the sanctum sanctorum of the Haji Ali Dargah, contravened Articles 14, 15 and 25 of the Constitution and said women should be permitted to enter the sanctum sanctorum like men.

The High Court had allowed a PIL filed by two women, Zakia Soman and Noorjehan Niaz, from NGO Bharatiya Muslim Mahila Andolan, challenging the ban on women's entry into the sanctum sanctorum of the dargah from 2012.

It had granted a six-week stay on the order on a request by the Dargah Trust to enable it to appeal before the Supreme Court.

The high court had held that the Trust had no power to alter or modify the mode or manner of religious practices of any individual or any group.

The High Court in its 56-page judgement had also noted that the "right to manage the Trust cannot override the right to practice religion itself".

It had said the trust has not been able to justify the ban legally or otherwise. Hence it cannot be said that the prohibition was an essential and integral part of Islam and whether taking away that part of the practice would result in a fundamental change in the character of the religion or belief.

It had also refused to accept the Trust's justification that the ban was imposed for safety and security of women, in particular, to prevent sexual harassment at places of worship.

The Trust had claimed that the ban was in keeping with an order of the Supreme Court wherein stringent directions have been issued to ensure that there is no sexual harassment to women at places of worship.

The court had noted that the aims, objectives and activities of the Haji Ali Dargah Trust were not governed by any custom or tradition and held that it was a public charitable trust and hence, open to people all over the world, irrespective of their caste, creed or gender.

The Maharashtra government had earlier told the court that women should be barred from entering the inner sanctorum of Haji Ali Dargah only if it is so enshrined in the Quran.

Comments

Syed
 - 
Monday, 24 Oct 2016

Performing Dargah Pooja is unpardonable sin in Islam.

Rashid
 - 
Monday, 24 Oct 2016

visiting these graves (darghas) either by men or women is against islamic belief ... whatever the decision , won't make any difference to community

Abdul
 - 
Monday, 24 Oct 2016

Wrong Number!..
Worship creator, not his creation.

Rikaz
 - 
Monday, 24 Oct 2016

Abbiya, you misunderstood about the concept of performing umrah and Haj....visiting grave of anyone is not allowed and which is prohibited for ladies....performing umrah or haj is religious duty....once in a life time if a Muslim financially strong enough is bound to perform these religious obligations.,,,,

Well Wisher
 - 
Monday, 24 Oct 2016

The last paragraph is so funny. Maharashtra Govt. was right. \Aaneye illaandmyake Ambaari ellind bantu kanawwa?\" There is nothing mentioned in the Qur'an about Dargah. In fact, Dargah & Durgah are the 2 faces of the same coin. Idol worship is major sin (Shirk) in Islam. Prophet also denied women's entry to the grave yard. I request MH govt to completely shut the dargah. It is just a money making, sexual harassment center. No relation with Islam. It is nothing but a Mafia."

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 26,2020

Dubai, Apr 26: Families were shattered as the three dead bodies of UAE-based Indian expats were returned to the country from New Delhi, India.

Family members waited outside the Indira Gandhi International Airport for hours, but they were later told to go back home as the remains of expats Jagsir Singh, Sanjeev Kumar and Kamlesh Bhatt were flown back to Abu Dhabi, following a new order implemented by India's Ministry of Home Affairs.

Inderjeet, brother-in-law of Sanjeev based in Al Ain, said their family in Punjab was devastated.

"This is a non-coronavirus death. We had a death certificate as proof and all necessary documents from Indian Embassy. But the body was returned while our family members waited outside the airport. This is very shocking," Inderjeet said.

"The body shouldn't have been returned. It's difficult to travel across states due to Covid-19 restrictions and also to arrange the ambulance," he added.

"Now the embassy has told me to come on Sunday. They said hopefully things will be sorted out in a day or two."

Meanwhile, the family of Kamlesh resides in the Indian state of Uttarakhand. This means, with existing travel restrictions, they had to secure permits from different states to reach New Delhi.

Dubai-based social worker Girish Pant, who is in touch with the family, said they are all depressed with the unfortunate turn of events.

"His brother Vimlesh had to return home without the remains. They are all clueless and in pain. With the new order from the Ministry of Home Affairs, I have informed the family that the body will reach them within 48 hours. I am also coordinating with the Indian Embassy," Pant said.

Comments

Ahmed A.K.
 - 
Monday, 27 Apr 2020

Now support BJP

 

Indian origins dont have place to cremate in their own land while our HM is planning to give nationality to minorities of other countries.

 

what a joke man!!!

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 9,2020

Udupi, Apr 9: Deputy Commissioner G. Jagadeesha said that criminal cases would be booked against owners of houses and sheds who were collecting rent from those, including workers, staying in rented houses.

In a statement issued here on Wednesday, Mr Jagadeesha said that to prevent the spread of COVID-19, restrictions had been imposed throughout the district under Section 144 (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

The administration had through an earlier order made it clear that house owners and shed owners should not collect rent from their tenants and workers for March and April.

But the administration had received complaints that some house owners and shed owners were collecting rent despite the order.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Ram Puniyani
January 22,2020

Shivaji is a great icon in Maharashtra. Different sections of society have given him very high status, though for diverse reasons. Folklores about him abound in the state. His statues, popular songs on him are very prevalent. These folk songs (Powadas) praise his multifarious actions. So it was no surprise that when Jayabhagwan Goyal, released his book, ‘Aaj ka Shivaji: Narendra Modi’, at religious-cultural meet organized by Delhi BJP, there was a strong resentment in Maharashtra. Various leaders from Maharashtra were furious. The Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut challenged the Shivaji’s descendent, Sambhaji Raje who is in BJP and is member of Rajya Sabha, to resign on the issue. Sambhaji Raje in turn stated that "We respect Narendra Modi, who was elected as the prime minister of the country for the second time. But neither (Narendra) Modi nor anybody else in the world can be compared with Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj,"

Not to be left behind Jitendra Awhad of NCP felt Modi-BJP are insulting the pride of Maharashtra. It is not the first time that controversy is erupting around the Maharashtra warrior of medieval period. Earlier we had seen Sambhaji Brigrade demanding the ban on James Laine book, Shivaji: ‘A Hindu King in an Islamic Kingdom’, for its objectionable content. Bhandarkar Institute in Pune, which had helped James Laine in his research, was also vandalized. At another level there was a talk that Babasaheb Purandare, a Brahmin, who has written some popular material on Shivaji will be made as the Chairman of the committee for statue of Shivaji. Maratha Mahasangh and Shiv Dharm officials objected to a Brahmin heading the committee for a statue for the Maratha warrior. The caste angel in Shivaji’s case is coming to the fore from quite some time.

While there is no dearth of controversies around Shivaji, it is also true that each political tendency has created Shivaji’s image from their political point of view. Who was the real Shivaji, is the question. One can see two clear streams of projection in this matter. On one hand there is an attempt to present Shivaji as the anti Muslim King, a king who was respecting Cows and Brahmins (Go Brahman pratipalak). This view was brought forward from the times of Lokmanya Tilak and picked up by Hindu nationalists, who have been looking for icons in history to suit their political agenda. Nathram Godse, while criticizing Gandhi says that Gandhi’s nationalism was dwarf in front of the one of Shivaji or Rana Pratap.

In tune with this the Hindu nationalists are promoting both these as icons of Hindu nationalism and giving anti-Muslim slant to the whole discourse. This discourse also hides in this the Brahmanical agenda of Hindu nationalism as Cows and Brahmins are presented as the central object of veneration by Shivaji. This image of Shivaji fits well into the current agenda of Hindu nationalists, being spearheaded by RSS Combine.

It is because of this that for seeking votes in Mumbai Narendra Modi on the eve of 2014 elections stated that Shivaji attacked Surat to plunder the treasury of Aurangzeb. This also presents Shivaji-Aurangzeb, Shivaji-Afzal Khan interactions as battle between Hindus and Muslims. The truth is that Surat was plundered for its wealth as it was a rich port city and Bal Samant’s book on the topic gives in depth description of the same. It is noteworthy that Shivaji began his real career of conquest in 1656 when he conquered Javli from the Maratha Chief Chandra Rao More. He took over the treasures of this kingdom. That it was not a Hindu Muslim battle becomes clear when we know that in confrontation with Aurangzeb it was Mirza Raja Jaisingh who was negotiating and engaging with Shivaji on behalf of Aurangzeb. And Shivaji had Muslim officers like Kazi Haider as confidential secretary and many Muslim Generals in his army.

Darya Sarang was chief of armor division, Daulat Khan was in-charge of his naval division; Ibrahim Khan was another general of significance in his army.  This mixed up administration just shows that the kings were not having Hindu or Muslim administration depending on their religion. In the confrontation between Shivaji and Afzal Khan, Rustam-e-Jaman was Shivaji’s side and Afzal Khan had Krisnaji Bhaskar Kulkarni on his side.

As far as Shivaji’s popularity is concerned it was due to his being a King with welfare of his subjects in his mind. He lightened the burden of taxation on the average peasants, and reduced the domination of landlords over the serfs. This picture of Shivaji is well documents in the booklets by Com. Govind Pansare (Who was Shivaji) and Jayant Gadkari (Shivaji: Ek Lok Kalyankari Raja- Shivaji: King doing People’s Welfare). He did not belong to the warrior caste so Brahmins had refused to coronate him, for which purpose Gaga Bhatt a Brahmin from Kashi was brought in with heavy fees. Teesta Setalvad’s hand book on History for teachers underlined this fact.

Today while BJP-Brahmanical forces want to present Shivaji as worshipper of Brahmins and cows, the non upper caste have seen through the game. As such it was Jotirao Phule who brought forward the caste angel of Shivaji as he wrote Powada (Poem) in his honor and today dalit Bahujan are not toeing Hindu Nationalist projection on the issue.

The likes of Jayabhagwan Goyal of BJP as such are trying to give two messages through such attempts. One hand they want to paint Shivaji in anti Muslim and Brahmanical color, they also want to give the subtle message of similarity of this presentation of Shivaji with what Modi is doing. Non BJP forces have seen this game and want to present the other picture of Shivaji, which was highlighted by the likes of Jotirao Phule and which today many of those standing for rights of dalit-Bahujan are trying to articulate. The criticism of the said, book, since withdrawn is on these twin aspects. One about the picture of Shivaji who was concerned about welfare of the farmers, and two his respect for people of all religions.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.