Rama Setu -1

[Guest]

Supreme Court's observations reported as S. Veerabadran Chettiar v. E. V. Ramaswami Naicker and others (AIR 1958 Supreme Court 1032):

".... Any object <b>however trivial or destitute of real value in itself</b> if regarded as sacred by any class of persons would come within the meaning of the penal section (295 of Indian Penal Code). Nor is it absolutely necessary that the object, in order to be held sacred, should have been actually worshipped. An object may be held sacred by a class of persons without being worshipped by them. It is clear, therefore, that the courts below were rather cynical in so lightly brushing aside the religious susceptibilities of that class of persons to which the complainant claims to belong. The section has been intended to respect the religious susceptibilities of persons of different religious persuasions or creeds. Courts have got to be very circumspect in such matters, and to pay due regard to the feelings and religious emotions of different classes of persons with different beliefs, <b>irrespective of the consideration whether or not they share those beliefs, or whether they are rational or otherwise, in the opinion of the court."</b>

http://www.centralchronicle.com/20070606/0606306.htm