Change of stand every now and then is not right, says Bench
The Supreme Court on Friday took exception to the Travancore royal family having conducted a ‘Devaprasnam' in August on the opening of ‘kallara (vault) B' at the Sree Padmanabhaswamy temple in Thiruvananthapuram.
A Bench of Justices R.V. Raveendran and A.K. Patnaik conveyed its displeasure to senior counsel K.K. Venugopal, appearing for Uthradam Tirunal Marthanda Varma, over the issue.
Mr. Justice Raveendran told counsel: “When we have asked the committee [appointed by the court] to decide on opening of ‘kallara B,' is it open to the committee to outsource it to others and seek ‘Devaprasnam'? The change of stand by the royal family every now and then is not right, particularly when we have passed orders after hearing you.”
Mr. Venugopal said: “There was a huge outcry against opening of kallara ‘B' and hence ‘Devaprasnam' was sought.” Mr. Justice Raveendran asked counsel whether the case was being considered by the court or by astrologers.
“Our primary concern when we passed the order was the religious sentiments should be respected. We would not like to interfere with that. When the value of the jewellery and other articles are put at more than a lakh crore of rupees, we wanted some safeguards and to provide some security,” the judge said. “If you [Mr. Marthanda Varma] are not able to decide because of old age, we will have to entrust the task to somebody else. You consult your family members and tell the court,” he told counsel.
Drawing the court's attention to the former Chief Minister, V.S. Achuthanandan's statement against the royal family, Mr. Venugopal said such a statement was defamatory. To this, Mr. Justice Raveendran said: “You are inviting such statements.”
In his fresh application, Mr. Marthanda Varma said: “A ‘Devaprasnam' was conducted under the supervision of Thanthris on August 8, 9, 10 and 11, and it revealed that ‘kallara B' should not be opened because it contained divinity connected with the deity in the temple, proximately placed to the sanctum sanctorum. The practice followed from time immemorial till this day that accords with the Agama Sastras and Tantric practice, ought not to be trespassed upon.”
Objecting to this affidavit, the court asked Mr. Venugopal why Mr. Marthanda Varma was changing his stand.
Senior counsel P.P. Rao appeared for Rama Varma, senior counsel Dhruv Mehta and counsel Vipin Nair and counsel P.B. Suresh appeared for Respondents 4, 5 and 6 (plaintiffs in the original suit).
Mr. Suresh drew the court's attention to the report of an Advocate Commissioner that there were attempts to remove the temple wealth in small quantities while they were being returned after daily worship.
The Bench posted the matter for September 12 for further hearing after taking on record the report of the committee, which was submitted earlier this week, and asking the Registry to give copies to the parties concerned.
It is quiet surprising to see such a stand from "Royal" family and the current "king". There are many people in this country who still believe that this country is under the rule of Kings and the British... May god open their eyes to see the democratic republic of India, which is not a religious state.
The decision taken by the Royal family to conduct Deva prashnam really mocked the highest court.It is unneccessery and unethical to conduct devaprashnam and it speaks above the court.
Do not mix up the false beliefs with the religion .Religion is a great wisdom and science.Go ahead with sientifical verdict.
The Supreme Court of India must recognize that judiciary is separate from culture and ancient traditions of India. Actually our judicial system "imported" from the west. Naturally this (judicial system) contains the system of the west. Judiciary must be separated from The culture and traditions of the society and we cannot prove all aspects of our culture in a court with proof. Mr. V.S. Achuthanandan who defamed the present head of the Travancore royal family by giving an irresponsible statement. Does he has any proof as far as his statement is concerned?
Faith should not be used as an excuse to hide dubious interests. If Supreme Court is looking into this matter, no amount of preaching of faith should be allowed by anybody. Its people's money and not the inheritance of any royal.
The concept of getting God's nods in the matters of temple wealth is a mockery and fraud. Sea shells may turn aroung upside down or upright as per the forces exerted on it for rolling. Let them conduct a hunderd times of rolling of the shells with a declaration of meaning of upside down of the numbers of shells and counting them either in odds or even numbers and declare the God's meaning of such poeration either odd or even numbers make out his will in respect of the questions placed. The results will vary from time to time, rolling to rolling. Keralites are known to do this fraud when ever they want certain things to be done as per their wish. Supreme court may be pleased to order for opening the entire vault and to count the inventory with assesment of their value. After all they are to be kept in custody in the same vaults once the enumeration is over.
It is odd that the Supreme Court of India persists in calling the erstwhile royal family of Travancore, the "Royal family". There are no monarchies in India, or are there?
Please Email the Editor