Ashwini and Satya posited that the decision in the Abhiram Singh v Commachen case, in which Hindutva was declared a “way of life”, emboldened this type of action. The view of the RSS seems to have been that action rooted in the Hindu faith, which was a “way of life”, did not violate secularism (Section 123). This gave rise to the question – is the Supreme Court responsible for ensuring that the verdicts it delivers are not misinterpreted by the government?
, 'Asphyxiated by Politics, Secularism Gasps for Breath: Can the Supreme Court Rescue It?' (23 Feb 2018) <https://thewire.in/law/politics-secularism-supreme-court> accessed on 25 Jan 2020