Ram Setu Vs Aurangzebs Tomb: National Heritage Debate Reaches Supreme Court

A countrywide debate has reignited over the popularity of India’s historical and culturally important websites, with a essential query now achieving the doorways of the Supreme Court: Why is Aurangzeb’s tomb a secure nationwide monument, however no longer the Ram Setu, an emblem of Hindu religion and historical heritage? In lately’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) in search of that Ram Setu (Adam’s Bridge) be formally declared a countrywide 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 importance in Hindu mythology. Referenced within the Ramcharitmanas, it’s believed to were built by means of Lord Rama’s military to succeed in Lanka and rescue Sita. Many ancient references — together with historical Persian and Arab texts — point out the life of a bridge-like construction within the area.

Despite this, Ram Setu has no longer gained nationwide monument standing underneath the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. The Act stipulates that any web site over 100 years previous with ancient, cultural, or architectural significance will also be declared a monument of nationwide importance.

Dr. Swamy’s petition argues that Ram Setu meets all prison standards and thus must be secure by means of the state.

Aurangzeb’s Tomb: A Protected Monument Since 1951

The controversy intensifies when in comparison to the standing of Mughal ruler Aurangzeb’s tomb in Maharashtra, which was once declared a secure monument on December 11, 1951, underneath the similar 1958 Act. This determination was once made all the way through the tenure of India’s first Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. Critics now ask why a tyrant’s tomb has prison coverage whilst Ram Setu does no longer, in spite of its deep non secular and cultural roots.

Government’s Stance And Legal History

The call for for Ram Setu’s coverage isn’t new. In truth, it’s been central to political and prison debates because the 1950s. In 2007, all the way through the UPA regime, the federal government submitted a sworn statement within the Supreme Court arguing that Ram Setu had no ancient or clinical proof supporting its life as an artificial construction. Senior suggest Fali S. Nariman even mentioned that Lord Rama himself destroyed the bridge upon his go back from Lanka.

However, in 2021, the Central Government licensed a find out about by means of the ASI to resolve whether or not Ram Setu is a herbal formation or human-made. The file has but to be made public.

In 2022, Union Minister Jitendra Singh said in Parliament that whilst conclusive evidence stays elusive, there’s ancient and mythological proof in want of Ram Setu’s life.

Historical Mentions

• In 850 CE, Persian geographer Ibn Khordadbeh referred to Ram Setu in his e-book Book of Roads and Kingdoms.

• In 1030 CE, Al-Biruni discussed 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 factor moves on the center of India’s ongoing cultural identification debate. Supporters argue that Ram Setu merits preservation no longer simply as a spiritual image however as a testomony to India’s historical heritage, one this is even visual by way of satellite tv for pc imagery. Critics of the present state coverage query why a construction connected to destruction (Aurangzeb’s tomb) receives coverage, whilst one related to development and religion stays left out.

As the Supreme Court hears the PIL, public discourse continues to accentuate. Social and political commentators assert that the verdict shall be a litmus check of ways India balances its ancient truths with trendy secular governance.

The Larger Question

Why is an emblem of tyranny secure, however a sacred bridge of religion and legend nonetheless waiting for popularity?

The country, and the perfect courtroom, should now come to a decision.