SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Kar) 1255

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
PRADEEP SINGH YERUR, J.
Shri Uttaradi Mutt - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Karnataka, Rep. by the Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Bengaluru & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 103982 of 2023 (GM-RES) C/W Writ Petition No. 103994 of 2023
Decided On : 05-07-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sri Jayakumar S. Patil, Senior Counsel, and Sri Ameet Kumar Deshpande, Senior Counsel for Sri Satish S. Raichur, Sri Bhushan B. Kulkarni and Sri Anand Bagewadi, Sri S.P. Shankar, Senior Counsel for Sri Phaniraj Kashyap.
For the Respondents: Sri Prashat V. Mogali, HCGP, Sri S.P. Shankar, Senior Counsel for Sri Phaniraj Kashyap, Sri Jayakumar S. Patil, Senior Counsel and Sri Ameet Kumar Deshpande, Senior Counsel.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 25 - Writ petition challenging rejection of applications for police protection during religious events - Both petitioners sought protection for separate religious rituals at Navabrindavana Gaddi. The Tahasildar's order was found arbitrary, insufficiently justified on law and order grounds. (Paras 12, 27)

(B) Religious Freedom - Right to perform religious duties - Court emphasized that religious practices are fundamental rights and should not be obstructed without substantial justification. (Paras 12, 22)

Facts of the case:
Two factions (Raghavendra Swamy Mutt and Uttaradi Mutt) contested police protection for carrying out Aradhana and Mahimotsava, previously rejected by the Tahasildar due to possible law and order issues.

Findings of Court:
Both petitions were allowed in part, granting specific timeframes for each faction's religious observances and directing the state to provide police protection.

Issues: The core issues revolved around the fundamental right to practice religion and the justifications for denying police protection during religious rituals.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the rejection of police protection based solely on potential conflicts was inadequate, highlighting that the essence of conducting rituals is a fundamental right under Article 25.

Result: Writ petitions are allowed in part, quashing the Tahasildar's order and granting specified dates for religious events.

ORDER :

Pradeep Singh Yerur, J.

Heard learned Senior counsel Shri S.P. Shankar on behalf of learned counsel Shri Phaniraj Kashyap, learned Senior counsel Shri Jayakumar S. Patil, and learned Senior counsel Shri Ameetkumar Deshpande on behalf of learned counsel Sri Satish S. Raichur for the petitioners in both these matters i.e., on behalf of Shri Raghavendra Swami Mutt and Shri Uttaradi Mutt, respectively.

2. These two petitions are filed by petitioners challenging the order passed by the Tahasildar dated 27.06.2023, wherein the Tahasildar has rejected the applications of both petitioners, namely two factions i.e., Shri Raghavendra Swami Mutt and Shri Uttaradi Mutt, who sought police protection for performing Aradhana of Shri Jayateertharu from 06.07.2023 to 08.07.2023 at Navabrindavana Gaddi and a similar application made by Uttaradi Mutt for celebrating of Raghuvarya Theerthara Mahimotsava for the dates from 04.07.2023 to 10.07.2023 at Navabrindavana Gaddi in Sy.No.192 of Anegundi, Gangavathi taluk, Koppal district.

3. It is very unfortunate to note that the great saint Shri Madhwacharya was philosopher, theologian and chief proponent of "Dvaita school of Vedanta" sadly his lineage descendents are now at logger heads with each other for performing Aradhana and to celebrate Mahimotsava. This is the 2nd round of litigation in the past two months. As earlier also, one of the petitioners had approached this Court against the order of Assistant Commissioner who had refrained from granting permission to conduct Mahimotsava and held that there would be law and order problem, due to which a petition came to be filed in W.P.No.103449/2023, which came to be disposed of by this Court on 05.06.2023 with regard to performing religious rituals/Aradhana and Shraddha which was fixed on 5th, 6th and 7th day of June-2023. The parties are once again before this Court in view of rejection of request/ representation made by both petitioners for providing them police protection to perform Aradhana of Shri Jayateertharu and celebrate Raghuvarya Theerthara Mahimotsava.

4. Though these petitions are listed for orders, with consent of learned Senior counsels for both the parties, who are present before the Court, these petitions are taken up for final disposal.

5. Learned Senior counsel Shri S.P. Shankar, Shri Jayakukar S. Patil, and Shri Ameetkumar Deshpande have vehemently argued on behalf of the respective petitioners enlightening this Court with regard to preaching of the great saint Shri Madhwacharya and so also his philosophy and the succession inherited by the followers and the Acharyas which has been conducted from centuries and the Aradhana performed in Navabrindavana Gaddi and the religious belief and the faith in conducting and performing this Aradhana and Mahimotsava in the Navabrindavana Gaddi.

6. It is the contention of learned Senior counsel Shri S.P. Sankar appearing on behalf of Shri Raghavendra Swamy Mutt that, the Raghavendra Swamy Mutt is a holy Moola Maha Samsthana established by Shri Madhwacharya amongst other Mutts established by him and follows traditions established by Shri Madhwacharyaru as per the customs and traditions of Madhwa parampara. That the performance of Aradhana of a saint is a bounden religious duty of the petitioner's Mutt pontiff. He also contends that Navabrindavana Gaddi is a tiny Island formed in Tungabhadra river in Anegundi village which is also called as Gajagahwara in Sanskrit, Gangavathi Taluka, Koppal District. He also contends that there are 9 holy saints of Madhwa Parampara. Hence, it is called Navabrindavana consisting of 9 Brindavanas. He also contends that out of 9 Brindavanas, Shri HH Padmanabha Theertharu, Shri HH Kavindra Theertharu and Shri HH Vageesha Theertharu are the subject matter of dispute between petitioners which is pending adjudication in RSA No.100446/2015 before the coordinate bench of this Court.

7. According to the learned Senior counsel Shri S.P. Shankar, along with above said 3 Brinda

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top