Gandhi?s statue : To be or not to be?

THERE ARE many reasons that make Allahabad a city of great historical value. And among these stands out its having been for long the high focal point from where potent vibrations moved out across the country for unshackling India from British slavery.

THERE ARE many reasons that make Allahabad a city of great historical value. And among these stands out its having been for long the high focal point from where potent vibrations moved out across the country for unshackling India from British slavery.

HT Image

And at the hub then was the Swaraj Bhawan whose ambience still recreates, among a large number of visitors and tourists, great memories of how India's future was literally scripted there by some of the finest leaders the freedom movement had thrown up-the tallest among them being Mahatma Gandhi.

Ironically, even years after the country had lapped up the reward of the freedom struggle, Allahabad which boasts of numerous statues of various personages, did not show up any statue of Gandhi. The initiative to fill up this conspicuous void came in 2003 from Mahatma's great grandson, Tushar Gandhi.
His All India Gandhi Vichar Andolan Manch, backed up by spontaneous local moral and financial support, succeeded in getting, on August 3, 2004, the permission of the Allahabad Development Authority (ADA) to install Gandhi's statue at a tri-square which, being a little more than a stone's throw from the Swaraj Bhawan, the place Gandhi had remained deeply associated with, was considered the most appropriate site for the statue.

The foundation stone was laid on January 30, 2005 by, Justice Amar Saran of the Allahabad High Court, and the statue was unveiled by Tushar Gandhi on March 12, 2006, at a function joined by eminent persons, including some judges.

But, serious trouble popped out subsequently for the statue, when a High Court bench, comprising Justice AK Yog and Justice Prakash Krishna, hearing, from time to time, a pending PIL petition on civic issues, was told by the petitioner, Anand Mohan, and a lawyer, Arvind Srivastava, on May 8, 2006, that the statue had been installed much against an earlier order of the bench, which had prohibited installation of statues that impaired traffic vision at the city's road crossings.

The bench, taking cognizance of their complaint that Gandhi's statue obstructed traffic, directed the district administration to re-install Gandhi's statue at a proper place, if possible inside an adjoining park, as suggested by the PIL petitioner and Arvind Srivastava.

The order was received with deep anguish by sections of people, who have been giving vent to it by holding meetings and passing resolutions against “any move to remove the statue from its present site”. Not only this, a human chain was formed around the Subhas Crossing in Civil Lines to oppose the move which, it was said, would hurt the dignity associated with the personage of Gandhi.

But, this is not how a court order can be undone, so now an intervention application, backed by a statement signed by hundreds of citizens, has been moved in the pending PIL by three organizations-Socialist Front, Allahabad, through Prof Shri Ballabh, Jagrat Samaj through Prof RC Tripathi, and All India Gandhi Vichar Manch through Ashok Kumar Gupta-praying to the court to revoke its order directing re-installation of Gandhi's statue.

Briefly, their pleas are: Gandhi's statue is only 5.7ft high and does not obstruct traffic which the court can itself see; its foundation stone was laid even before the PIL, in question, had been filed; no authority, not even the ADA, had objected to the statue's installation; the court had taken “for granted” the statement made “casually” before it on May 8, 2006, that the statue obstructed traffic; about 100 other statues continue to exist without any objection; and that even the court “itself had permitted the stalling of a statue” at another similar site.

The intervention petition that came up before Justice Yog and Justice VC Mishra, on Wednesday last was posted for hearing on July 31 in view of the request made by the interveners' counsel, senior advocate, Ravi Kiran Jain, assisted by KK Roy, that it be heard when senior advocate, SN Verma, amicus curiae in the PIL, would be available in town. Meanwhile, the fate of the statue of the Father of the Nation hangs in balance!