Sanatana Dharma set of eternal duties towards nation, parents, teachers; why should it be destroyed? Madras High Court

Amidst the ongoing debate over Sanatana Dharma following DMK minister Udhayanidhi Stalin's comments, Madras High Court Thursday said that Sanatana Dharma is a set of eternal duties enjoined upon those who follow the Hindu way of life including duties towards nation, parents and Gurus and wondered why such duties should be destroyed..Single-judge Justice N Seshasayee said he was conscious of the debates around Sanatan Dharma and could not help but ponder over it in a judicial order for he felt genuinely concerned about the issue.The judge went on to say that while Sanatan Dharma was intended to be a way of life but somewhere down the line, the idea that it was only about promoting casteism and untouchability had spread.Untouchability cannot be tolerated even if it is permitted within the principles of sanatana dharma, he clarified."Somewhere, an idea appears to have gained ground that Sanadhana Dharma is all about, and only about, promoting casteism and untouchability. Untouchability in a country of equal citizens, cannot be tolerated, and even if it is seen as permitted somewhere within the principles of 'Sanathana dharma', it still cannot have a space to stay, since Article 17 of the Constitution has declared that untouchability has been abolished," the Court said.The Court was hearing a petition filed by one Elangovan, challenging a circular issued by a local government Arts College asking students to share their thoughts on the topic 'Opposition to Sanadhana' on the birth anniversary of former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and DMK party founder CN Annadurai. .While the Court disposed of the plea after noting that the circular had already been withdrawn by the College and thus, the prayer in plea was infructuous, it took the opportunity to express its views on Sanatan Dharma.."This Court is conscious to the very vociferous, and at time noisy debates on pro and anti Sanathana Dharma. It has also broadly understood Sanathana Dharama as a set of 'eternal duties', and that it cannot be traced to one specific literature, but has to be gathered from multiple sources which, either relate to Hinduism, or which those who practice the Hindu way of life, have come to accept. It includes the duty to the nation, duty to the King, King's duty to his people, duty to one's parents and Gurus, care for the poor, and whole lot of other duties. If the topic chosen by the impugned circular is now tested on the plane of these duties, it would then mean that all these duties are liable to be destroyed. Should not a citizen love his country? Is he not under a duty to serve his nation? Should not the parents be cared? With genuine concern for what is going round, this Court could not help pondering over it," Justice Seshasayee wrote in an order passed on September 15. .The Court went on to say that while it still encouraged the concerned college to require the students to reflect on the topic, one must keep in mind that the framers of the Constitution had consciously not made right to free speech an absolute right and instead chose to impose reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2). ."How free speech is seen exercised these days? If the free speech madethrough the social media is taken as a basis, anyone who has little to do with science, or rocket, or space, will be lecturing on rocket science. While this is also accommodated within the right to free speech, yet it may he helpful to gain some attention, and may not take it beyond. It would be appreciable, if free speech encourages dispassionate, and healthy public debates, and help the society to move forward, along the lines which the Constitution envisages. At the end of the day, every citizen traces his existence to the Constitution, and hence it is his duty to abide by its values, its ethos, and to hold an uncompromising abidance to its spirits. This should not be forgotten. Hope it prevails," the Court said. .[Read Order]