A DEVOUT HINDU WINS BID FOR THE RIGHT TO BE CREMATED
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
A devout Hindu wins bid for the right to be cremated
BBC Media Player v.2.18.13034.14207 (Video)
A devout Hindu has won his bid for the right to be cremated on a
traditional funeral pyre.
Mr Ghai was refused a cremation permit by Newcastle City Council in
2006.
Davender Ghai, 71, was seeking to overturn a 2006 Newcastle City
Council decision forbidding him from being cremated according to his
beliefs.
Mr Ghai said he had only wanted to clarify the law
Last year his challenge was dismissed by the High Court, but that
ruling has been overturned at the Court of Appeal.
Judges decided the pyre would be lawful after Mr Ghai said it could
include walls and a roof with an opening.
"Today's verdict has breathed new life into an old man's dreams"
Davender Ghai
In February 2006, the founder of the Anglo-Asian Friendship Society
(AAFS), from Gosforth, Newcastle, was refused a permit for a
cremation site in a remote part of Northumberland.
Newcastle City Council said the burning of human remains anywhere
outside a crematorium was prohibited under the 1902 Cremation Act.
The Ministry of Justice, which opposed the appeal case, had backed
the local authority's decision.
But the Court of Appeal judges accepted that Mr Ghai was willing to
be cremated within existing rules with his funeral pyre "enclosed in
a structure" and ruled that the Ministry of Justice definition of a
building was too narrow.
Delivering the verdict, Master of the Rolls, Lord Neuberger, who
headed the appeal panel, said: "Contrary to what everyone seems to
have assumed below, and I am not saying it is anyone's fault, it
seems to us that Mr Ghai's religious and personal beliefs as to how
his remains should be cremated once he dies can be accommodated
within current cremation legislation."
Mr Ghai said the ruling had "breathed new life into an old man's
dreams".
He said: "I always maintained that I wanted to clarify the law, not
disobey or disrespect it.
"The Court of Appeal understood my request was consistent with both
the spirit and letter of the law and my only regret is that tax
payers' money would have been saved had that been recognised in 2006.
"My request was often misinterpreted, leading many to believe I
wanted a funeral pyre cremation in an open field, whereas I always
accepted that buildings and permanent structures would be
appropriate."
'Air quality'
He added: "All the time I had complete faith that justice would be
done. Now I can go in peace."
Newcastle City Council said it had refused permission for a
traditional "open-air" funeral pyre, whereas on appeal Mr Ghai had
agreed his beliefs could be satisfied within a building.
A spokesman said: "However, the judgment goes on to state that the
difficulties which may be thrown up by planning and public health
legislation, should an application be submitted, have not been
considered as part of this judgment.
"Furthermore, the method of burning associated with funeral pyres is
not covered by any regulations which currently only apply to
cremators powered by gas or electricity which are designed to
maintain environmental standards, in particular air quality.
"Following the judgment, all local authorities will await further
guidance from the Ministry of Justice as regards any proposed
regulations or legislation which may control the proposed manner of
cremation to ensure environmental standards and public health are
protected."
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/england/tyne/8507811.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/tyne/8507811.stm
End of forwarded message from S. Kalyanaraman
Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
Since newsgroup posts are being removed
by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
this post may be reposted several times.
hari....@indero.com
have an open fire. On appeal he asked to do it in a building within
which could be an open fire. Here is ruling: