test

Kerala High Court Dismissed Plea Which Sought For Enactment Of Law Against Black Magic

on

|

views

and

comments

Case Title: Kerala Yukthi Vadi Sanghom vs Union of India

A division bench of Chief Justice SV Bhatti and Justice Basant Balaji dismissed the writ petition on the ground that there was no representation made on behalf of the petitioner (Kerala Yukthi Vadi Sanghom) despite of matter listed for several times.

“No representation for the petitioner on 26.05.2023 in the forenoon and afternoon. There is no representation for the petitioner today also. Hence, we are constrained to dismiss the writ petition for default”.

The petitioner stated that the state has been continuously witnessing crimes in connection with superstitious beliefs.

“It has come to light several cases of human sacrifices and other types of assaults in connection with the superstitious belief of black magic and witchcraft. For the purpose of god’s grace, financial gains, getting jobs, resolving family problems, the birth of children, and for several other desires, some people are practicing black magic and witchcraft of which people belong to the downtrodden, and the children and women are mostly the victims”.

The petitioner claimed that they have approached central and state government seeking an adequate enactment of a law prohibiting the practice of black magic to combat the issue, however, no action has been taken.

The petition also sought directions to the state government to take decision on the Law Reforms Commission report in regards to the enactment of the Kerala Prevention of Eradication of Inhuman Evil Practices, sorcery and Black Magic Bill, 2019 which is submitted by Justice KT Thomas.

The petition also sought directions to take action against producers, directors, actors and writers  as there are many films, advertisement, telefilms on many social sites platform and on television that shows superstitious practices, which prompt people to indulge in such activities.

However, the court dismissed the matter as no one appeared on behalf of petitioner despite of matter listed for several times.

Share this
Tags

Recent Updates

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

More like this

error: Content is protected !!