Back
High Court Of Calcutta
M. N. RAY, RUMA PAL
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE - Appellant
Versus
ACHARYA JAGDISHWARANANDA ABADHUTA - Respondent
F. M. A. T. 1451 Of 1990
Decided On : 11/08/1990
ANANDA MARGA - RELIGION - ARTS. 25, 26 - PERFORMANCE OF TANDAVA DANCE IN PUBLIC PROCESSION - RIGHT TO PERFORM - PROTECTION UNDER ARTS. 25, 26 - SCOPE OF - RECENTNESS OF PRACTICE - WHETHER AFFECTS STATUS AS RELIGION - SECULAR ACTIVITY - DIRECTIONS BY SPIRITUAL HEAD - BINDING NATURE - PUBLIC ORDER, MORALITY - WHETHER AFFECTED BY PERFORMANCE OF TANDAVA DANCE.
Fact of the Case:
Ananda Marga, founded by P. R. Sarkar, known as "sri Ananda Murtiji" to his followers, introduced the Tandava Dance in 1966 to be performed publicly in processions. State Authorities prohibited the dance under S. 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Anandamargis challenged the prohibitory orders, but the Supreme Court held that the Ananda Marga was a religious denomination within Hinduism but that the Anandamargis had not established that the public performance of the Tandava Dance was an essential part of their belief, and thus could not claim protection under Arts. 25 or 26 of the Constitution.
Finding of the Court:
In 1986, a revised edition of Ananda Murtiji's precepts, known as "caryacarya," contained directions that the Tandava Dance be performed during certain festivals in procession in public. The Ananda Marga Pracaraka Sangha applied for permission to hold a public procession with Tandava Dance, but it was refused by the Police Authorities. The Supreme Court directed the High Court to examine the matter, keeping in view its earlier judgment. The High Court held that the Tandava Dance was an essential and integral part of the religion of the Ananda Marga and that they had a right to perform it in public subject to restrictions imposed under Arts. 25 and 26 of the Constitution.
Issues: 1. Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to entertain the writ proceeding in light of the Supreme Court's earlier judgment. 2. Whether the Ananda Marga is a separate religion entitled to the protection of Art. 25 of the Constitution. 3. Whether the Tandava Dance is a "matter of religion" within the meaning of Art. 26 (b) of the Constitution and entitled to protection.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Supreme Court's earlier judgment did not finally conclude the matter, as it directed the High Court to reconsider the matter in light of the revised caryacarya. 2. The word "religion" in Art. 25 does not refer to a particular religion but to religion in general, and a practice need not be adopted by all members of a religion to be considered religion. 3. The word "matter of religion" in Art. 26 (b) overlaps with the concept of professing, practising, and propagating religion under Art. 25 of the Constitution. 4. The performance of the Tandava Dance in public procession is part of the Ananda Marga religion and is a matter of religion within the meaning of Arts. 25 and 26, as it is prescribed by their religious preceptor and accepted by the followers as a method of achieving spiritual upliftment. 5. The recentness of the practice does not detract from its status as religion, as practices may be introduced according to the decision of the spiritual head. 6. The Tandava Dance is not a secular activity, as its performance with a view to propagating the concepts represented by the dance cannot be termed secular. 7. The State Authorities' refusal to allow the Tandava Dance on public roads was not based on any reasonable grounds of public order or morality and was therefore unjustified.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the High Court's decision was upheld. The Police Authorities were directed to permit the Anandamargis to perform the Tandava Dance in public procession on the occasion of their principal religious functions, subject to their undertaking to maintain peace and discipline on such occasions.
( 1 ) THE Ananda Marga was founded by one P. R. Sarkar who was known to his followers and "sri Ananda Murtiji". The followers of Ananda Marga are known as Ananda Margis. For Anandamargis Ananda Murtiji is their guru and his precepts are binding on them. It is contended by the Anandamargis that in 1966 the Tandava Dance was introduced by Ananda Murtiji to be performed publicity in processions on special occasions. This alleged introduction was not in writing. The performance of the Tandava Dance in a public procession was prohibited by the State Authorities under orders passed from time to time under S. 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Representatives of the Anandamargis challenged the prohibitory orders issued under S. 144, Cr. P. C. by way of writ proceedings in 1982. The matter was ultimately disposed of by the Supreme Court in 1983. The judgment (hereinafter referred to as the earlier judgment) has since been reported in Jagadishwarananda v. Commr. of Police, Calcutta, (1983) 4 SCC 522. In disposing of the matter the Supreme Court held that the Ananda Marga was a religious denomination within Hinduism but was of the view that the Anandamargis had not been able to establish that the public performance of the Tandava Dance was an essential part of the their belief and as such they could not claim the protection of Art. 25 or 26 of the Constitution. In arriving at its finding the Supreme Court had observed that no literature had been produced by the Ananda Margis in support of their contention that it was essential to their belief that the Tandava Dance should be performed in public.
( 2 ) IN 1986 a revised edition of the precepts of Ananda Murtiji was published. The precepts which are known as "caryacarya" contain directions that the Tandava Dance is to be performed during certain festivals in procession in public.
( 3 ) IN May, 1987 an application was made by the Ananda Marga Pracaraka Sangha to the Police Authorities for permission to hold a "public procession with Tandava Dance". This permission was refused by the Police "in terms of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. . . . . . . . . . . . on the subject. " The present writ petitioner then filed an application under Art. 32. of the Constitution before the Supreme Court challenging such refusal.
( 4 ) THE Supreme Court disposed of the application under Art. 32 directing that the case should be appropriately examined by the High Court keeping in view what has been said by the Supreme Court in the earlier judgment. The petitioners were given the liberty to go before the High Court. It is the writ petitioners' case that pursuant to such leave the present writ petition was filed in the Calcutta High Court.
( 5 ) THE writ application was heard and disposed of by B. P. Banerjee, J. , who held that "the Tandava Dance as prescribed for the followers of Ananda Marga is an essential and integral part of the religion of the said religious denomination and they have a right to perform such a dance in public on the occasions prescribed in this behalf subject to the to the restrictions imposed under Arts. 25 and 26 of the Constitution and the Police Authorities have no jurisdiction to impose a ban on such dance".
( 6 ) THE State respondents have preferred this appeal from the judgment and order of B. P. Banerjee, J. The appellants represented by the Advocate-General have challenged the order basically on three grounds namely-1) That the issues involved in the present writ proceedings had already been determined by the Supreme Court in the earlier writ proceeding. The earlier judgment of the Supreme Court it is contended, is final and there was no scope for the same issue to be re-agitated or determined by this Court. 2) In any event the Ananda Marga was not a separate religion and was not entitled to the protection of Art. 25 of the Constitution. 3) The Tandava Dance was at best a secular function and not a "matter of religion" within the meaning of Art. 26
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
