'We Worship Lions During Durga Puja': Calcutta High Court In VHP's Plea Which Claimed Naming Lioness 'Sita' Allegedly Hurt Religious Sentiments

The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday heard a plea by the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) against the naming of a lioness at Siliguri's Safari Park as 'SITA.'

Earlier Live Law had reported on the plea filed by the VHP.

“Vishwa Hindu Parishad has with deep anguish observed that a species of cat family has been named after the name of "SITA" the consort of Lord Rama and she is sacred deity to all Hindus across the world. Such act amounts to blasphemy and is a direct assault on the religious belief of all Hindus,” the plea stated.

The matter was heard by a single bench of Justice Saugata Bhattacharya.

The petitioners argued that they were praying for a direction that no animal shall be named after a deity. They apprehended that if this amounted to slander, and if it was allowed then people would resort to naming "a donkey after a religious deity" as well.

Upon hearing the plea, the bench referred the lion at the feet of the Goddess Durga, and remarked, "It may be named out of affection, we worship lions during Durga Puja. It depends on the mental orientation of the person. Can we imagine Durga without a lion?"

Petitoner's counsel contended that the only reason why a lion was at the feet of Goddess Durga was because it was meant to attack evil on all sides, and that the lion was not given any name. 

The bench further noted that the plea moved by the VHP was in the nature of a public interest litigation and therefore had to be converted into a PIL and placed before the bench having determination over PILs.

Advocate for the petitioner argued that the rights of the people belonging to a particular religion had been infringed and that the remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution would apply in such a case. 

It was also submitted that there was a great amount of confusion regarding the naming of the lioness, that had come as part of a pair, from Tripura Zoo.

The petitioners argued that the Tripura Zoo authorities had not named the lions, and that a media report revealed that the State Zoological department had named the lion Akbar, and the lioness Sita, but that the State was shirking responsibility for the same and would contend that the pair had not been named.

Upon hearing these submissions, the Court directed the State counsel to obtain instructions regarding whether or not the lions had been named, and posted the matter for hearing at a later date.

Case: VISWA HINDU PARISAD AND ORS. v STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS

Case No: WPA 360/2024