IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
G.Ganthi ... Petitioner
Vs
The Revenue Divisional Officer - Respondent
W.P.Nos.19128 and 21769 of 2023 and W.M.P.Nos.18385 and 21115 of 2023
Decided on : 20-02-2025
ORDER :
Both the Writ Petitions have been filed challenging the very same order passed by the first respondent under Section 145 of Cr.P.C ., dated 07.06.2023 and as such, this Court passed a common order.
2. The Temple, viz., Arulmigu Draupathi Amman Thirukovil (hereinafter referred to as 'the Temple' for short), is situated at Melpathi Village, Villupuram Taluk and District. The case of the petitioners is that the Temple is dedicated to the worship of a particular community and it was established and constructed by the members belonging to that particular community. It is situated in R.S.No.65/2 and R.S.65/3 of Melpathi Village, Villupuram District, owned by the people of that particular community. Therefore, it is a denominational Temple and its administrators, viz., the Trustees, are elected by the people of that particular community. It is an ancient Temple and has been governed by the people of that particular community for more than 100 years. The daily Poojas and festivals on special occasions are conducted by the people of that particular community and the contributions will be collected from the said community people. Further, the deity of the Temple is also considered to be the family deity of that particular community.
3. While that being so, during the festival called "Theemithi Thiruvizha", which was held on 07.04.2023, a dispute arose between two community people, resulting in the registration of FIRs in Crime Nos. 178 and 179 of 2023 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 294(b), 341, 323, 324, 354, 153A(2), 504, and 506(1) of IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(1)(w)(I), 3(1)(za)(C), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and for the offences under Sections 147, 354, 354A, 509, 153A(2), and 506(i) of IPC and Section 4 of the TNPHW, 2002, respectively. However, according to the petitioner, the said incidents are in no way connected to the Temple festival and it is an individual dispute. However, the fourth respondent issued a notice, thereby directing the Trustees of the Temple to hand over the charge of the Temple, relying upon the order passed by the third respondent dated 11.04.2023, thereby appointing the fourth respondent as a fit person for the Temple as contemplated under Section 49(1) of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act . However, it was set aside by this Court in W.P.No.13531 of 2023 on the ground that no notice was served to the existing Trustees. Pursuant to the registration of the First Information Report, no one is allowed to enter the Temple, since there is a communal dispute.
4. Therefore, the complaint was referred for initiation of proceedings under Section 145 of Cr.P.C . before the first respondent. The first respondent conducted an enquiry between A party and B party, in which both the petitioners belong to A party and passed an order on 07.06.2023. The first respondent concluded that there is a law and order issue since there is a dispute between two community people. Pursuant to the same, there are five criminal cases registered in Crime Nos. 177, 178, 179, 237, and 238 of 2023, while celebrating the festival for the Temple. Therefore, until further orders, no one is permitted to enter the Temple, failing which action will be taken against the violators.
5. The learned counsel for the respective petitioners would submit that the Temple is a denominational one and belongs to a particular community, though all general public are allowed to worship the deity of the Temple. Further, the contention of the petitioners is that the daily Poojas are to be conducted for the Temple, since it involves the sentiment/belief of all the local villagers. Considering the above contention, this Court passed an interim order dated 18.03.2024, directing the Joint Commissioner, HR & CE Department to utilize the service of a Pujari who will perform the Poojas for the Temple, and the Temple will be opened only to enable the Pujari to enter into the Temple to perform the daily Pooja
The court affirmed that access to public temples cannot be restricted based on caste or community, emphasizing the fundamental right to worship under Article 25 of the Constitution.
Caste cannot claim ownership of a temple as it is deemed public unless declared private; only distinct religious groups qualify as denominations under constitutional protections.
Closure of a temple without just cause violates the fundamental right to religious practice under Article 25 of the Constitution, emphasizing protection of rituals and religious freedom.
The court emphasized that caste discrimination violates constitutional rights, mandating equal access to worship and festivals for all communities.
A temple is classified as private if it lacks features of public worship and management rests with a specific community, as established through historical evidence and refusal of public rights.
Stray incidents do not justify blanket executive ban on religious festival celebrations in temple under Articles 25, 26; rights prevail subject to reasonable restrictions with proximate nexus to publ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.