'What Difficulty In Namaz? Can't Forget 1857': Delhi HC On Plea Against 'Maharani of Jhansi' Statue In Park
The high court asked the Committee what was the difficulty in offering Namaz in presence of the idol of Maharani of Jhansi Laxmibai.
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday accepted the apology from the Shahi Idgah Managing Committee over a petition against a single judge which rejected its plea against the installation of the statue of “Maharani of Jhansi” inside the Shahi Idgah Park situated in Sadar Bazar area. The court had taken strong exception to communal language in the plea in an earlier hearing.
The Shahi Idgah Managing Committee told the high court that it will file the petition after making necessary changes. The next hearing in the matter will be on October 4.
The high court asked the Committee what was the difficulty in offering Namaz in presence of the statue of Maharani of Jhansi Laxmibai. The court said that the country cannot forget the Revolt of 1857 and that Maharani of Jhansi is a historical figure and not a religious figure.
Last week the Delhi High Court pulled up the Shahi Idgah Managing Committee for making scandalous pleadings in its appeal against a single judge which rejected its plea against the installation of the statue of “Maharani of Jhansi” inside the Shahi Idgah Park situated at city's Sadar Bazar area.
A division bench of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela had said in the last hearing that the appeal was “divisive” and that the Managing Committee was doing communal politics and using court for the same. The court had orally remarked earlier that someone seems to have lost their mind while making such "scandalous pleadings” in the petition against the single judge order by the Delhi High Court. The high court said that she is a national hero and not any religious figure that her statue will obstruct Namaz in the park.
The court took strong exception to the paragraphs in the plea and said that the plea is a divisive plea and Rani of Jhansi is a historical figure. The court had said that let's not divide history on communal grounds.
Top Headlines
