Ram Setu Vs Aurangzeb`s Tomb: National Heritage Debate Reaches Supreme Court-OxBig News Network

A nationwide debate has reignited over the popularity of India’s historical and culturally important websites, with a important query now reaching the doorways of the Supreme Court: Why is Aurangzeb’s tomb a protected nationwide monument, however not the Ram Setu, an emblem of Hindu religion and historical heritage? In at this time’s DNA, Rahul Sinha, Managing Editor of Zee News, reported that, The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the Government of India at the moment are underneath public and judicial scrutiny, as former Rajya Sabha MP Dr. Subramanian Swamy has filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) looking for that Ram Setu (Adam’s Bridge) be formally declared a nationwide monument.

#RamSetu | राम धरोहर, रामसेतु राष्ट्रीय धरोहर… इतने प्रमाण, इतने निशान, फिर भी घमासान!

रामसेतु को राष्ट्रीय स्मारक कब बनाएंगे?#DNAWithRahulSinha #DNA @RahulSinhaTV pic.twitter.com/WPlg4uJgWH

— Zee News (@ZeeNews) May 27, 2025

Ram Setu: A Symbol Of Faith and History

Located between India and Sri Lanka, Ram Setu holds deep non secular significance in Hindu mythology. Referenced within the Ramcharitmanas, it’s believed to have been constructed by Lord Rama’s military to achieve Lanka and rescue Sita. Many historic references — together with historical Persian and Arab texts — point out the existence of a bridge-like construction within the area.

Despite this, Ram Setu has not acquired nationwide monument standing underneath the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. The Act stipulates that any web site over 100 years outdated with historic, cultural, or architectural significance could be declared a monument of nationwide significance.

Dr. Swamy’s petition argues that Ram Setu meets all authorized standards and thus must be protected by the state.

Aurangzeb’s Tomb: A Protected Monument Since 1951

The controversy intensifies when in comparison with the standing of Mughal ruler Aurangzeb’s tomb in Maharashtra, which was declared a protected monument on December 11, 1951, underneath the identical 1958 Act. This resolution was made throughout the tenure of India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. Critics now ask why a tyrant’s tomb has authorized safety whereas Ram Setu doesn’t, regardless of its deep religious and cultural roots.

Government’s Stance And Legal History

The demand for Ram Setu’s safety isn’t new. In truth, it has been central to political and authorized debates for the reason that Fifties. In 2007, throughout the UPA regime, the federal government submitted an affidavit within the Supreme Court arguing that Ram Setu had no historic or scientific proof supporting its existence as a man-made construction. Senior advocate Fali S. Nariman even said that Lord Rama himself destroyed the bridge upon his return from Lanka.

However, in 2021, the Central Government licensed a examine by the ASI to find out whether or not Ram Setu is a pure formation or human-made. The report has but to be made public.

In 2022, Union Minister Jitendra Singh acknowledged in Parliament that whereas conclusive proof stays elusive, there’s historic and mythological proof in favor of Ram Setu’s existence.

Historical Mentions

• In 850 CE, Persian geographer Ibn Khordadbeh referred to Ram Setu in his ebook Book of Roads and Kingdoms.
• In 1030 CE, Al-Biruni talked about the bridge in Kitab-ul-Hind, calling it “Setu Bandh”.
• A Dutch cartographer in 1747 marked the world as “Raman Kweel” in his maps.

The Political And Cultural Undercurrent

The challenge strikes on the coronary heart of India’s ongoing cultural id debate. Supporters argue that Ram Setu deserves preservation not simply as a spiritual image however as a testomony to India’s historical heritage, one that’s even seen by way of satellite tv for pc imagery. Critics of the present state coverage query why a construction linked to destruction (Aurangzeb’s tomb) receives safety, whereas one related to building and religion stays uncared for.

As the Supreme Court hears the PIL, public discourse continues to accentuate. Social and political commentators assert that the choice will probably be a litmus check of how India balances its historic truths with fashionable secular governance.

The Larger Question

Why is an emblem of tyranny protected, however a sacred bridge of religion and legend nonetheless awaiting recognition?

The nation, and the very best court docket, should now determine.