Many believe SC's 'Hindutva' verdict needs to be overruled: Manmohan Singh

Former PM also said that security forces must remain uncontaminated from any sectarian appeal

Former prime minister Manmohan Singh on Tuesday said India's armed forces were "a splendid embodiment of our secular project" and it was vitally important that they remain "uncontaminated from any sectarian appeal".

Delivering the second A B Bardhan memorial lecture on ‘defence of secularism and constitution’ in New Delhi, the former prime minister said the onus of preserving the secular robustness of the Indian republic rested on its institutions, particularly the judiciary, Election Commission and media.

“Our armed forces have a glorious record of keeping away from the politicians’ manipulations and intrigues. It is vitally important that the armed forces remain uncontaminated from any sectarian appeal,” Singh said.

During his speech, Singh also said that Justice J S Verma's “famous but controversial” ‘Hindutva a way of life’ judgment ended up making India's political discourse somewhat lopsided. 

“The verdict had a decisive impact on the ongoing debate among the political parties about the principles and practices of secularism in our republic,” Singh said. "Many believe that there can be no doubt that the decision requires to be overruled, he added.

The judgement had equated the political ideology of Hindutva with Hinduism, and said Hindutva does not in itself depict an attitude hostile to people practising other religions.

The former prime minister didn’t refer to any political party or organisation by name, but was unmistakably alluding to recent developments in the judiciary, armed forces, and media.

Singh said judiciary as an institution should never lose sight of its primary duty to protect the secular spirit of the Constitution. 

“This task has become much more demanding than before because the political disputes and electoral battles are increasingly getting over-laced with religious overtones, symbols, myths, prejudices. The judiciary needs to arrive at its own enlightened view of its custodianship of the Constitution – “irrespective of the irresponsible and selfish politicians who have no qualms in injecting communal virus in our body politic," he said.

Singh said the Election Commission had an important role in preserving the secular fabric of the republic. He said it is incumbent on the Election Commission to see to it that religion and religious sentiments and prejudices do not get worked into the electoral discourse. "The Commission must be thinking of rolling back the ease acceptance of over-manipulation of secular imagery," the former PM said.

Tracing the origins of India's secular Constitution, Singh spoke on the presidential speech delivered at the Lahore session of the Indian National Congress by Jawaharlal Nehru. He said that it was now fashionable to suggest that it was Nehru and Nehru alone who insisted on introducing this European concept of a secular state in the Indian constitutional and political discourse. "This suggestion is grossly unfair to the entire national leadership, including Mahatma Gandhi, Sardar Patel, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and others, which fully endorsed and shared Nehru’s secular ideals and formulations," he said.

Singh said some Hindu fanatics never forgave Mahatma Gandhi for his steadfast commitment to a secular state and “settled their score with the greatest son of India”. "But the idea of a secular India did not die – and could not die – with the Mahatma’s assassination," he said.

Singh also quoted from former prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s 2001 new year “musings” from Kumarakom, where he said secularism wasn’t an alien concept that India imported out of compulsion after independence. “Rather, it is an integral and natural feature of our national culture and ethos,” Singh quoted Vajpayee as having said.

Singh said the demolition of the Babri Masjid was a traumatic event which brought disrepute to India's secular commitments.

"The entire political leadership too came in for criticism for failing to protect a place of worship,” he said.

“In particular, concerned citizens were deeply disappointed at the judiciary’s stance in the events leading up to the demolition,” he added.