IHC moved in Hindu temple case

ISLAMABAD: Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani of the Islambad High Court (IHC) here on Monday issued notices to the federal government as a petitioner alleged that the civic authorities have put no restrictions on visitors to remove their shoes while entering a Hindu temple in Said Pur village of Islamabad that hurts feelings of the Hindu minority.

Issuing notices, IHC bench adjourned the matter until October 25.Petitioner Adil Gill, a resident of Rawalpindi, through his counsel Yasir Mehmood Chaudhry advocate has cited Ministry of Capital Administration and Development Division (CADD) through its secretary, Capital Development Authority (CDA) through its chairman, Islamabad Capital Territory (ICT) through its Chief Commissioner and Islamabad Metropolitan Corporation (IMC) through its mayor as respondents.The petitioner said that he is a Hindu by religion and under the Constitution of Pakistan every citizen enjoys equal rights regardless of religion and sect.

That he wants to draw the attention of authorities towards the disgrace and humiliation by visitors of a Hindu temple at Said Pur village of Islamabad. That the said temple is a sacred place for Hindu community. It is located inside a Haveli which has been converted into a Picture Gallery by the CDA. The visitors come in the said gallery and also visit the temple; unfortunately, all the visitors enter the temple wearing their shoes. The visitors take their pictures inside the temple and also make noise. This whole scene injures the sanctity of the temple as well as the religious feelings of the petitioner and the Hindu community.

That the temple is as sacred, sacrosanct and holy as a mosque is for Muslims and a church for Christians.That the petitioner also filed applications dated May 15, 2016 to the respondent authorities but no action was taken.

That the respondents are violating and negating the articles 20 & 36 of the Constitution. Article 20 is about freedom to profess religion and to make religious institutions subject to law, public order and morality. And article 36 is about protection of minorities. Under this article the State shall safeguard the legitimate rights and interest of minorities including their due representation in the Federal and Provincial Services.

The petitioner said that all the respondents are under obligation to act in accordance with the law as provided under Article 4 of the Constitution.The petitioner has prayed to the court to direct the respondents to appear personally before the court and explain as to why this practice of disgracing the Hindu temple has continued since long. The court may also impose a ban upon the visitors to enter the Hindu temple while wearing shoes, making noise in the temple and taking pictures inside, the petitioner further prayed.