Decoding The Judgement on Sallekhana Santhara of The Rajasthan High Court

SR No.: 250435
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: C Devkumar Jain
Publisher: C Devkumar Jain
Publication Year: 2015
Total Pages: 25
Language: English
Classification: Article
File Size: 671 KB

Page 5

falls within the ambit of Section 309 IPC. It is further stated that the petitioner has placed on record some clippings of the newspaper and as no complaint has been filed in the Police Station, the investigation is not permissible in law. It is stated that the petitioner has not carried out any research and has also failed to go through the Article 25 of the Constitution of India, which gives right to freedom of religion.
The State Government has relied on a study The Justice TK Tukol, former Vicecarried out by Justice T.K.Tukol, It is submitted Chancellor, Bangalore University, has written on behalf of the State that it is not in public a book published from Ahmedabad, namely, interest to entertain such petition. He has failed "Sallekhana is not suicide" in which a lot of to submit on record that the practice of research work and instances have been given Santhara/Sallekhana is practised under force or and which provides the procedure, stage, compulsion and does not amount to religious situation for the person, who wants to adopt activity, whereas it is sufficient to state at this or follow the religious path known as stage that this religious practice or activity or "Sallekhana". The pdf copy of this book is faith is nowhere defined as illegal or criminal act now available and it is the duty of Jain samaj and as such, the same is neither punishable nor to revise the book with more examples and subjected to investigation unless any specific citation from missing scriptures etc. complaint is received by the police authorities.
11
A reply has been filed by Shri Vimal Chand Daga, Strategically, we must underplay this line of Secretary of Sthanakvasi Jain Shravak Sangh, argument as the largely Hindu practice of Jaipur impleaded as respondent no.3. The Sati is now banned by law. Secondly, present litigation is a cloak for attaining private samadhi maran, ichcha mrutyu and ends by a member of the Hindu Society against a Prayopavesa are Hindu practices similar to religious minority community known as "Jain". In Santhara/Sallekhana. The respondents have Appeal No.9575/2003 decided on 21.8.2006, the listed examples of Vinoba Bhave, Supreme Court held that Jain religion is Ramakrishna Pramahans that this practice is undisputedly not a part of Hindu religion.
not exclusive to Jains.
12
The eloquent arguments of the respondents may be read at Annexure 1
Some of these objections must be addressed in the appeal.
PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS 1. The petitioner is neither a scholar in Jainism nor he has studied the practice of Sallekhana or Santhara. 2. The petitioner has neither made the ladies who had taken Santhara as parties to the petition nor the Jain community. It is by way of additional affidavit that their names have been disclosed. It is settled law that no amount of evidence can be looked into for which there are