Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 65159
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Devan Ramachandran, J
ST. ANTONY'S FORANE CHURCH, KIZHAKAMBALAM, ERNAKULAM – Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF (RURAL) – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 4859 OF 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: ENOCH DAVID SIMON, JOEL S.SREEDEV, RONY JOSE, DERICK MATHAI, SAJI KARAN SCARIA ABRAHAM
For the Respondents: ADV. P.G. JAYASHANKAR, P.K.RESHMA (KALARICKAL), S.RAJEEV, SAJANA V.H, SHAIJU GEORGE, AADERSH R.S. PANICKER, PUSHPAVATHI.K, SRI T.S.SYAMPRASANTH-GP
The court cannot intervene in ecclesiastical matters under Article 226 when there are pending civil proceedings addressing the same.
Headnote:The court analyzed issues surrounding the conduct of rituals at a church involving petitioner and respondents. The court noted ongoing civil proceedings addressing the same matters. It concluded that intervention under Article 226 was inappropriate due to the existing litigation. The court directed law and order to be maintained during rituals, leaving remedies open in civil court.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. rituals conduct controversy (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding lawful conduct (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's observations on jurisdiction (Para 5) |
| 4. final directives for maintaining order (Para 6) |
The controversy in this case between the parties is as to how the rituals are to be conducted in the 1st petitioner – Church.
2. I do not propose to go into the details of the rival contentions because, it was conceded by the learned counsel on both sides, when this matter was called today, that civil cases have been filed by respondents 3 to 7 before a competent Civil Court, which is still pending, qua the same issue.
3. Sri.T.S.Syamprashanth – learned Government Pleader, submitted that, since the parties are at war with respect to the manner of conduct of rituals in the Church, the Police have little role to play; but that they are maintaining law and order on a regular basis, without allowing any person to commit any act of breach of peace. He submitted that the Police will abide by any direction to be issued by this Court or by the competent Civil Court; and thus prayed that this Writ Petition be dismissed, or ordered only on such terms.
4. Sri.P.G.Jayashankar – learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 to 7, pertinently submitted that his clients have no intention of causing any obstruction to the conduct of rituals in the Church; but that the attempt of the 2nd petitioner to conduct it in violation of the instruction given by the ‘Holy See’ is peremptorily illegal and unlawful. He affirmed that his clients have, therefore, approached a competent Civil Court for orders and that the Suit is still pending.
5. It is thus obvious that, on issues relating to the conduct of rituals in the Church, this Court cannot intervene, while acting under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, particularly when the parties are already litigating it before the competent Civil Court.
6. As far as the Police are concerned, they have to ensure that the internecine issues between the parties do not degenerate into a law and order issue; and that neither of them is allowed to take law into their own hands.
In the afore circumstances, I allow this Writ Petition, recording the afore submissions of the rival parties, as also that of the learned Government Pleader; thus consequentially directing the 2nd respondent to ensure that law and order is maintained in the Church at every point of time; and that none of the parties - be that the petitioners or the party respondents - are allowed to take law into their own hands, or to commit any action which would be in violation of law.
As far as the parties are concerned, their remedies before the Civil Court are fully reserved; for which purpose, their rival contentions in that regard are left undecided.
