On August 2, 2024, the Supreme Court of India rejected a PIL filed by Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, which sought action against superstition and sorcery practices. The Court emphasized the importance of educating citizens to cultivate a ‘scientific temper,’ noting that such matters are better add
On August 2, 2024, the Supreme Court of India declined to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay. The PIL sought directives for the Union and state governments to take action against superstition and sorcery practices in the country. The Court emphasized the importance of educating citizens to foster a ‘scientific temper’ rather than relying solely on judicial interventions. The bench, led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, asserted that such matters fall within the legislative domain and cannot be enforced through court orders alone.
Key Details and Events:
Court’s Observations and Decision:
- The Supreme Court refused to issue a notice in the PIL, stating that the prayers sought were within the legislature’s domain.
- CJI Chandrachud questioned the practicality of court directives to eradicate superstition and emphasized education as a means to promote rational thinking.
- The Court noted that promoting a scientific temper is not solely a judicial matter but requires a broader societal approach through education.
Arguments by the Petitiocner:
- Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay Filed the PIL under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution, seeking actions against superstition and sorcery.
- Citing Precedents: Referred to the murder of Narendra Dhabolkar, an activist against superstitious practices, to highlight the dangers of such beliefs.
- The petitioner sought to tag the PIL with another pending case, Durga Dutt v. Union of India, related to the enforcement of Fundamental Duties, which the Court declined.
Reliefs Sought in the PIL:
- Requested directions to the Union and state governments to take appropriate measures to protect citizens’ fundamental rights under Articles 14, 21, and 25.
- Proposed constituting an Expert Committee to explore the feasibility of criminalizing superstition and sorcery.
- Sought a report from the Law Commission of India on the prevention of superstition and sorcery within six months.
Related Cases and Context:
- Durga Dutt v. Union of India: A case before Justice Sanjiv Khanna‘s bench, involving the enforcement of Fundamental Duties as per the Justice JS Verma Committee’s Report.
- Kerala High Court Case (2022): A similar petition was filed, seeking the enactment of the Kerala Prevention of Eradication of Inhuman Evil Practices, Sorcery and Black Magic Bill, 2019.
ASHWINI KUMAR UPADHYAY VS. UNION OF INDIA W.P.(C) No. 000461 / 2024
