SLOW POISONING PUNJAB- THE AGENTS DIVERTING THE ATTENTION FROM THE REAL ISSUES FACING SIKHS IN INDIA
Sikh Vichar Manch
A Bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justices R V Raveendran...
8/10/14
Sikh Vichar Manch <svmanch@gmail.com>
8/12/14
SIKH (Sikh-Hindu) CLAIM TO AN INDEPENDENT STATUS IN INDIAN LAWS DENIED:
BY PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
CWP 18634/2011
IS IT JUSTIFIED?
SIKH (Sikh-Hindu) CLAIM TO AN INDEPENDENT STATUS IN INDIAN LAWS DENIED:
The story is altogether mischievous!!! Said by the Sikh Vichar Manch
What are the ulterior motives of filing such petitions? Who will answer?
An analysis by Balbir Singh Sooch-Sikh Vichar Manch
POINTS AT GLANCE:
1.     A documentation regarding one’s marriage is indeed significant from not only legal point of view but also from the perspective of emotions as alleged before filing the petition.
2.     Was the Advocate Rohit Garg hurt more than Sikhs especially than the panthdardi Dr Kharak Singh ji, that’s why he is one of the petitioners in this case?
3.    Have petitioners sighted the following SC decision in their petition or suppressed and concealed the material facts from the High court?
4.    A Bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justices R V Raveendran and Deepak Verma explained the proviso to Article 25 to allay the misconception of Sikhs.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Sikhs-petition-SC-to-wriggle-out-of-Hindu-embrace/articleshow/5474137.cms
Sikhs petition SC to wriggle out of Hindu embrace
5.     RELIEF asked in the petition: That the petitioners are not seeking any alteration in any statute whatsoever, all of which are indeed progressive, modern, and confer equality and ensure fairness to one and all, and are in line with the most advanced nations of the day….(See: Paragraph No. 21 of the petition).
6.     In brief, we (petitioners) filed a PIL (CWP 18634/2011) in the Punjab and Haryana High Court on the 3rd October, 2011 and the same was dismissed and in the Punjab and Haryana High Court on the 3rd October, 2011 adjudged ‘myopic, (narrow-minded, bigoted, prejudiced, intolerant) fissiparous and uncalled for.’
7.     Do you think that the Petition deserves the fate it met, question asked by Birendra Kaur on her behalf as well as on behalf of another petitioner?
It seems to be a very naughty question asked and is double-edged rather multi-edged asked dishonestly as seems only an exercise notoriously by the central secret intelligent agencies by misusing the petitioners and others  before the matter is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
The relevant contents from the petition etc:
Birendra Kaur said, “Since the object of my study was to understand the relation of Sikhs vis-à-vis the Constitution, I concentrated on that. It was easy to notice that the word ‘Hindu’ was being used in two different senses, sometimes as a ‘name of a religion’ and sometimes as a ‘collective reference to Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains’. I further realized that this was the root cause of the feeling of discrimination, misrepresentation that the Sikhs experience, and, therefore, their current agitations against the registration of marriages under the Hindu Marriage Act.”
A documentation regarding one’s marriage is indeed significant from not only legal point of view but also from the perspective of emotions. But it came clear that seeking registration of marriage under an Anand Marriage Act, or even seeking a whole new Anand Marriage Act was not the ultimate solution to the woes of Sikhs, as they shall still remain Hindu, as per the legal terminology of the Indian Constitution [Article 25], as well as according to the other Acts of the Hindu Law, as mentioned above. For matters related to all aspects of family life, such as, marriage and divorce; infants and minors; adoptions; wills, intestacy and succession; joint family and partition; etc., they would still remain Hindu.
Was the Advocate Rohit Garg hurt more than Sikhs especially than the panthdardi Dr Kharak Singh ji?
“Advocate Rohit Garg, a young lawyer, my sons’ friend, is a frequent visitor at home. I thought of sharing the issue with him.
Of course, I had no bias towards the word ‘Hindu’ itself, but only the manner in which it was being used. But still my family was apprehensive about it, lest Rohit should feel offended. Keeping this in mind, I proceeded cautiously, guardedly. I was amazed that Rohit not only listened to the issue with an open mind but also grasped the same in the right earnest and perspective. Here was an upright, mature soul in a young man (Advocate Rohit Garg). He said he understands exactly what those clubbed under the name of another religion must feel. He rather felt that such use of the word affects the Hindus too.
In his own words: “Hinduism is a religion, and it belongs to only Hindus, and none others. No body is in a position to represent religion of others. And if it is a way of life of various people, then there is no need to call it a religion.” His commitment to his religion can be appreciated from his wearing a janeu since the age of 23. (It means or looks as the Advocate Rohit Garg hurt more than Sikhs especially than the panthdardi Dr Kharak Singh ji. Or the writ filed to convey a message that Hindus are more hurt from clubbing Sikh religion etc under the name of another religion i.e. Hindu religion on the plea, “Hinduism is a religion, and it belongs to only Hindus, and none others. Nobody is in a position to represent religion of others. And if it is a way of life of various people, then there is no need to call it a religion” words attributed to Advocate Rohit Garg, a petitioner as a Hindu.)”
That the petitioners are not seeking any alteration in any statute whatsoever, all of which are indeed progressive, modern, and confer equality and ensure fairness to one and all, and are in line with the most advanced nations of the day….(See: Paragraph No. 21 of the petition).
We (petitioners) filed a PIL (CWP 18634/2011) in the Punjab and Haryana High Court on the 3rd October, 2011. The same is reproduced on Page 7. Its Judgment appears on Page 33, and a Rejoinder to the Judgment appears on Page 37. This entire material is also placed on the website: www.drkharaksingh.org The case was dismissed. It has been adjudged ‘myopic, fissiparous and uncalled for.’
In brief, we (petitioners) filed a PIL (CWP 18634/2011) in the Punjab and Haryana High Court on the 3rd October, 2011 and the same was dismissed and in the Punjab and Haryana High Court on the 3rd October, 2011 adjudged ‘myopic, (narrow-minded, bigoted, prejudiced, intolerant) fissiparous and uncalled for.’
SIKH (Sikh-Hindu) CLAIM TO AN INDEPENDENT STATUS IN INDIAN LAWS DENIED:
The story is altogether mischievous!!! Said the Sikh Vichar Manch
What are the ulterior motives of filing such petitions? Who will answer?
An analysis by Balbir Singh Sooch-Sikh Vichar Manch
http://www.sikhvicharmanch.com/B10.htm
https://www.facebook.com/balbir.singh.355
Sikh Vichar Manch <svmanch@gmail.com>
8/12/14
http://www.drkharaksingh.org/_docs/book_the_word_hindu_case.pdf#page=3
Respected Ms Birendra Kaur : Birendra Kaur birendrakaur@gmail.com
Respected Ms Birendra Kaur, Ph.D. (Punjab University) in the subject of Zoology has worked as Sr Lecturer, Sri Guru Gobind Singh College, Sec 26, Chandigarh, from 1991 to 2008. Assisted in editorial work with Institute of Sikh Studies [1991 to 2009]. Associate Editor, Abstracts of Sikh Studies, its quarterly Journal [2008 to 2010]. Settler, Dr Kharak Singh Trust. Associated with International Sikh Confederation & Institute of Sikh Studies; authored two Books - Hail Hair! and On Sikh Identity; Participated in Numerous Seminars; Published Numerous Research Papers; Exposed to Sikh issues of our times as daughter of Dr Kharak Singh, a world-renowned personality, who was dedicated and committed to concerns of Sikhism.
I never met you and I don’t know as how to address you, as my sister or as my daughter etc.
You are a specialist not ‘GENERALIST’ and that’s why you seem narrowly trapped so by the Dr Kharak Singh ji, Navkiran supported and guided by the Indian secret intelligence agencies.
Dr Kharak Singh ji may not know the contents of the petition.
Navkiran knows me very well and I know his compulsions as to why he is following the dictates of the Indian secret intelligence agencies since long for such purposes, otherwise, he is a good hypocrite Sikh out of greed.
P.S:
Respected All Concerned,
Without giving any clarification on my raised issues, objections and allegations, and, only using abusive language for me (Balbir Singh Sooch) shall not serve any purpose of Sikhs except cheating them by carrying on filing such friendly petitions/writs etc.
“AS RELIEF asked in the petition: That the petitioners are not seeking any alteration in any statute whatsoever, all of which are indeed progressive, modern, and confer equality and ensure fairness to one and all, and are in line with the most advanced nations of the day….(See: Paragraph No. 21 of the petition).”
What does it mean?
Then what else do the petitioners want?
Are the petitioners going to get more than this:-
A Bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justices R V Raveendran and Deepak Verma explained the proviso to Article 25 to allay the misconception of Sikhs.
“The plea sought directions for amendment to Article 25 of the Constitution for implementing the recommendation of a commission headed by Justice M N Venkatachaliah to delink Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism from the Hindu Marriage Act.
The Bench, also comprising Justices R V Raveendran and Deepak Verma, said though it was in agreement with the issues raised in the petition, it could not entertain the subject as it had to be looked into by an appropriate authority in the government.”
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Sikhs-petition-SC-to-wriggle-out-of-Hindu-embrace/articleshow/5474137.cms
Sikhs petition SC to wriggle out of Hindu embrace”?
The Punjab and Haryana High Court on the 3rd October, 2011 already has decided the PIL (CWP 18634/2011) of petitioners and the same was dismissed and adjudged it as ‘myopic, (narrow-minded, bigoted, prejudiced, intolerant) fissiparous and uncalled for.’
In spite of the above decision of ‘The Punjab and Haryana High Court’ and my raised issues, objections and allegations with regard to relief sought in the petition, still I hope for the best, if the petition/appeal/writ succeeds to delink Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism from the Hindu Marriage Act and other Hindu Acts without seeking any alteration in any statute, but only in the interest of more unity and integrity of India as jointly intended by the petitioners.
Sikh Vichar Manch