NK GOSWAMI's banner

NK GOSWAMI

@NarendraGoswami • 1,912 subscribers

⚖️ Advocate | Supreme Court of India 🇮🇳 The Constitution is supreme. No ruler above the law. No citizen beneath it. Defending liberty against arbitrary power.

Shorts

Ganesha is not made of Plaster of Paris. You cannot insult a stone. The real insult is to your own consciousness. Man is the only animal who is absurd. He prays to the river, then poisons it. He worships the idol, then drowns it in filth. This is schizophrenia. The true temple is the river, the air, the earth. You spend 11 days in celebration, but where is the meditation? Where is the silence? The DJ and the alcohol are your escapes. The idol is just a toy. If you want to respect Ganesha, respect existence. Clean the river, not just the statue. That would be true prayer. The Idol, the River, and the Hypocrisy: Drowning the Divine in Filth : The Real Insult to Ganesha. The post raises a troubling question, but the answer lies not in theology, but in constitutional morality. Article 25 guarantees the freedom of religion, but it is expressly subject to "public order, morality, and health." Article 21 guarantees the right to a clean environment. When an idol made of Plaster of Paris and toxic chemical dyes is dumped into a river, it is not an act of faith; it is an environmental tort. The Supreme Court and the NGT have laid down clear guidelines mandating eco-friendly clay idols and designated immersion sites. The "absurdity" is not the ritual itself, but the willful disregard of the law that protects the very water we call sacred. Let us be brutally honest. The top comment is not an insult to Ganesha; it is a mirror held up to a society that has lost its way. The law is no respecter of religious sentiments when they become a public nuisance. If you spend lakhs on an idol, drink alcohol, dance to loud DJs, and then treat the river as a garbage dump, you are not practicing religion—you are committing a public wrong. The "Polluter Pays" principle must apply with full force to pandals, municipalities, and individuals alike. The real insult is not the immersion; it is the sheer hypocrisy of poisoning the environment in the name of God. Enforce the law, or stop pretending we are a civilized society. By NK Goswami,Advocate,Supreme Court

Ganesha is not made of Plaster of Paris. You cannot insult a stone. The real insult is to your own consciousness. Man is the only animal who is absurd. He prays to the river, then poisons it. He worships the idol, then drowns it in filth. This is schizophrenia. The true temple is the river, the air, the earth. You spend 11 days in celebration, but where is the meditation? Where is the silence? The DJ and the alcohol are your escapes. The idol is just a toy. If you want to respect Ganesha, respect existence. Clean the river, not just the statue. That would be true prayer. The Idol, the River, and the Hypocrisy: Drowning the Divine in Filth : The Real Insult to Ganesha. The post raises a troubling question, but the answer lies not in theology, but in constitutional morality. Article 25 guarantees the freedom of religion, but it is expressly subject to "public order, morality, and health." Article 21 guarantees the right to a clean environment. When an idol made of Plaster of Paris and toxic chemical dyes is dumped into a river, it is not an act of faith; it is an environmental tort. The Supreme Court and the NGT have laid down clear guidelines mandating eco-friendly clay idols and designated immersion sites. The "absurdity" is not the ritual itself, but the willful disregard of the law that protects the very water we call sacred. Let us be brutally honest. The top comment is not an insult to Ganesha; it is a mirror held up to a society that has lost its way. The law is no respecter of religious sentiments when they become a public nuisance. If you spend lakhs on an idol, drink alcohol, dance to loud DJs, and then treat the river as a garbage dump, you are not practicing religion—you are committing a public wrong. The "Polluter Pays" principle must apply with full force to pandals, municipalities, and individuals alike. The real insult is not the immersion; it is the sheer hypocrisy of poisoning the environment in the name of God. Enforce the law, or stop pretending we are a civilized society. By NK Goswami,Advocate,Supreme Court

208,052 просмотров

Videos

Anya Rossi

sweetdream.ai

SweetDream.ai•Sponsored•Livecam

Watch Anya Live

Anya is streaming live right now! Join her private show and enjoy exclusive content.

Exclusive private shows

1.2k viewers online

Private Show

Join now for exclusive access

Free preview available • Premium content

THE CONSTITUTION PROTECTS PROTEST — NOT A PRIVILEGE TO DISOBEY THE LAW. JANTAR MANTAR, THE COCKROACH JANTA PARTY AND THE LIMITS OF CONSTITUTIONAL DISSENT The Delhi High Court's questions to CJP leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka go to the heart of constitutional democracy. If you have executed a peace bond, what legal justification permits you to disregard its conditions? If Parliament has provided a statutory appellate remedy under Section 414 BNSS for specified security and surety orders, why bypass that remedy without establishing exceptional grounds? And if the Government has designated alternative protest sites, why insist upon entering a restricted location rather than pursuing lawful remedies? THE RIGHT TO PROTEST IS NOT THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE WHICH LAWS ONE WILL OBEY. But the Constitution places an equally serious duty upon the State. A PEACE BOND CANNOT BECOME A BOND OF POLITICAL SILENCE. No administration may use preventive powers to punish citizens merely for expressing dissent. Every restriction must satisfy the law; every detention must withstand judicial scrutiny. THE CONSTITUTION RECOGNISES NEITHER AN UNACCOUNTABLE GOVERNMENT NOR AN UNACCOUNTABLE PROTESTER. Political passion cannot replace legal discipline. State authority cannot replace constitutional restraint. THE RULE OF LAW IS NOT A WEAPON TO BE USED AGAINST ONE SIDE. IT IS THE STANDARD BY WHICH BOTH SIDES MUST BE JUDGED. — NK Goswami Advocate, Supreme Court of India #DelhiHighCourt #JantarMantar #CockroachJantaParty #RightToProtest #SupremeCourt #BNSS #SauravDas #AshutoshRanka #DelhiPolice #Article226 #RuleOfLaw #ConstitutionOfIndia #NKGoswami Cockroaches of India Cockroach Janta Party - CJP Cockroach Janta Party Rahul Gandhi Prashant Bhushan Mahesh Jethmalani Kapil Sibal Akhilesh Yadav Mohan Bhagwat RSS Donald J. Trump Elon Musk Sanjay Singh AAP Sanjay Dutt

THE CONSTITUTION PROTECTS PROTEST — NOT A PRIVILEGE TO DISOBEY THE LAW. JANTAR MANTAR, THE COCKROACH JANTA PARTY AND THE LIMITS OF CONSTITUTIONAL DISSENT The Delhi High Court's questions to CJP leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka go to the heart of constitutional democracy. If you have executed a peace bond, what legal justification permits you to disregard its conditions? If Parliament has provided a statutory appellate remedy under Section 414 BNSS for specified security and surety orders, why bypass that remedy without establishing exceptional grounds? And if the Government has designated alternative protest sites, why insist upon entering a restricted location rather than pursuing lawful remedies? THE RIGHT TO PROTEST IS NOT THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE WHICH LAWS ONE WILL OBEY. But the Constitution places an equally serious duty upon the State. A PEACE BOND CANNOT BECOME A BOND OF POLITICAL SILENCE. No administration may use preventive powers to punish citizens merely for expressing dissent. Every restriction must satisfy the law; every detention must withstand judicial scrutiny. THE CONSTITUTION RECOGNISES NEITHER AN UNACCOUNTABLE GOVERNMENT NOR AN UNACCOUNTABLE PROTESTER. Political passion cannot replace legal discipline. State authority cannot replace constitutional restraint. THE RULE OF LAW IS NOT A WEAPON TO BE USED AGAINST ONE SIDE. IT IS THE STANDARD BY WHICH BOTH SIDES MUST BE JUDGED. — NK Goswami Advocate, Supreme Court of India #DelhiHighCourt #JantarMantar #CockroachJantaParty #RightToProtest #SupremeCourt #BNSS #SauravDas #AshutoshRanka #DelhiPolice #Article226 #RuleOfLaw #ConstitutionOfIndia #NKGoswami Cockroaches of India Cockroach Janta Party - CJP Cockroach Janta Party Rahul Gandhi Prashant Bhushan Mahesh Jethmalani Kapil Sibal Akhilesh Yadav Mohan Bhagwat RSS Donald J. Trump Elon Musk Sanjay Singh AAP Sanjay Dutt

385,839 просмотров • 2 дней назад

“The State may prevent a breach of peace. It cannot presume that the exercise of liberty is itself a breach of peace.” — N. K. Goswami, Advocate, Supreme Court of India Public order is a constitutional obligation. It is not a constitutional blank cheque. The State is entitled to regulate an unlawful gathering. It is not thereby entitled to restrict the lawful movements of an entire population without independent justification. A citizen travelling to a hospital is not a protester. A passenger arriving by train is not an offender. A hotel guest is not a conspirator. The absence of permission for one assembly cannot become a universal licence to restrict everybody else's liberty. I ask neither for immunity from law nor for judicial permission to create disorder. I ask only that every restriction upon constitutional freedom be justified by lawful authority, demonstrable necessity and proportionality.

“The State may prevent a breach of peace. It cannot presume that the exercise of liberty is itself a breach of peace.” — N. K. Goswami, Advocate, Supreme Court of India Public order is a constitutional obligation. It is not a constitutional blank cheque. The State is entitled to regulate an unlawful gathering. It is not thereby entitled to restrict the lawful movements of an entire population without independent justification. A citizen travelling to a hospital is not a protester. A passenger arriving by train is not an offender. A hotel guest is not a conspirator. The absence of permission for one assembly cannot become a universal licence to restrict everybody else's liberty. I ask neither for immunity from law nor for judicial permission to create disorder. I ask only that every restriction upon constitutional freedom be justified by lawful authority, demonstrable necessity and proportionality.

319,221 просмотров • 14 дней назад

WHEN LAWYERS ARE DRAGGED, THE CONSTITUTION IS ON TRIAL The Constitution does not confer fundamental rights as an act of governmental generosity. It guarantees them as limitations upon governmental power. When Senior Consel informed the Supreme Court that advocates had allegedly been dragged through the streets, detained in buses, and that armed miscreants had attacked citizens while the police stood by, he raised a question far greater than the dignity of the Bar. He raised the question of whether the Rule of Law still governs those entrusted with enforcing it. A policeman’s uniform is not a licence to violate liberty. Nor can Section 163 BNSS become a charter for executive absolutism. The right to peaceful protest is not extinguished because its exercise embarrasses the Government. Public order is a constitutional necessity; it cannot become a convenient euphemism for suppressing dissent. Chief Justice Surya Kant rightly emphasised the right of advocates to participate peacefully at designated locations. But the constitutional duty does not end with recognising a right. A right without an effective remedy is a constitutional promise reduced to a political platitude. The Supreme Court is not merely the highest court of the land. It is the final sentinel of those liberties which the Executive may find inconvenient and the citizen cannot afford to lose. When the State demands restraint from citizens, the Constitution demands restraint from the State. And when those who plead for justice are themselves allegedly subjected to coercion, judicial silence risks becoming the most eloquent encouragement to arbitrary power. The majesty of the Supreme Court lies not in the height of its dome, but in the courage of its judgments. — NK Goswami Advocate, Supreme Court of India #SupremeCourt #CJISuryaKant #GopalSankaranarayanan #SCBA #RuleOfLaw #ConstitutionOfIndia #CivilLiberties #DelhiProtests #NKGoswami

WHEN LAWYERS ARE DRAGGED, THE CONSTITUTION IS ON TRIAL The Constitution does not confer fundamental rights as an act of governmental generosity. It guarantees them as limitations upon governmental power. When Senior Consel informed the Supreme Court that advocates had allegedly been dragged through the streets, detained in buses, and that armed miscreants had attacked citizens while the police stood by, he raised a question far greater than the dignity of the Bar. He raised the question of whether the Rule of Law still governs those entrusted with enforcing it. A policeman’s uniform is not a licence to violate liberty. Nor can Section 163 BNSS become a charter for executive absolutism. The right to peaceful protest is not extinguished because its exercise embarrasses the Government. Public order is a constitutional necessity; it cannot become a convenient euphemism for suppressing dissent. Chief Justice Surya Kant rightly emphasised the right of advocates to participate peacefully at designated locations. But the constitutional duty does not end with recognising a right. A right without an effective remedy is a constitutional promise reduced to a political platitude. The Supreme Court is not merely the highest court of the land. It is the final sentinel of those liberties which the Executive may find inconvenient and the citizen cannot afford to lose. When the State demands restraint from citizens, the Constitution demands restraint from the State. And when those who plead for justice are themselves allegedly subjected to coercion, judicial silence risks becoming the most eloquent encouragement to arbitrary power. The majesty of the Supreme Court lies not in the height of its dome, but in the courage of its judgments. — NK Goswami Advocate, Supreme Court of India #SupremeCourt #CJISuryaKant #GopalSankaranarayanan #SCBA #RuleOfLaw #ConstitutionOfIndia #CivilLiberties #DelhiProtests #NKGoswami

56,444 просмотров • 11 дней назад

THE CONSTITUTION CANNOT WAIT FOR THE NEXT ELECTION! DELETED VOTERS, DELAYED JUSTICE—A REPUBLIC ON TRIAL. In West Bengal's SIR appeals, approximately 93% of decided appeals have resulted in inclusion. Yet lakhs of appeals remain unresolved. The Supreme Court has been told that elections are approaching while citizens await decisions on their voting rights. An appeal decided after an election may restore a name—but it cannot restore a lost vote. A constitutional right without a timely remedy is a magnificent illusion. And when peaceful protesters question the Election Commission, the State must remember: the police exist to preserve public order, not to protect public authorities from criticism. The law permits proportionate restrictions. It does not permit the arbitrary suppression of dissent. Democracy cannot survive on postponed hearings, deleted names and barricaded voices. The ballot must not become a casualty of bureaucracy. Nor dissent a casualty of police power. #SupremeCourt #WestBengalSIR #RightToVote #RightToProtest #Constitution #RuleOfLaw #NKGoswami

THE CONSTITUTION CANNOT WAIT FOR THE NEXT ELECTION! DELETED VOTERS, DELAYED JUSTICE—A REPUBLIC ON TRIAL. In West Bengal's SIR appeals, approximately 93% of decided appeals have resulted in inclusion. Yet lakhs of appeals remain unresolved. The Supreme Court has been told that elections are approaching while citizens await decisions on their voting rights. An appeal decided after an election may restore a name—but it cannot restore a lost vote. A constitutional right without a timely remedy is a magnificent illusion. And when peaceful protesters question the Election Commission, the State must remember: the police exist to preserve public order, not to protect public authorities from criticism. The law permits proportionate restrictions. It does not permit the arbitrary suppression of dissent. Democracy cannot survive on postponed hearings, deleted names and barricaded voices. The ballot must not become a casualty of bureaucracy. Nor dissent a casualty of police power. #SupremeCourt #WestBengalSIR #RightToVote #RightToProtest #Constitution #RuleOfLaw #NKGoswami

41,866 просмотров • 14 дней назад

Больше нет контента для загрузки