The court affirmed the necessity of police intervention to protect religious practices from disruptions.

JUDGMENT

Petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers :-

a. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction direction 2^nd and 3^rd respondent to a and effective police protection to the petitioner to conduct religious services in St.Mary’s Orthodox Valiyapally, Ayur, Kollam District without any let, hindrance or obstruction from 3^rd and 4^th respondents.

b. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the second and third respondents to afford sufficient adequate and effective police protection to the life of the parishioners and property of the St.Mary’s Orthodox Church, Ayur against the illegal acts and obstructions causing by the party respondents.

c. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the second and third respondents to afford sufficient adequate and effective police protection to the parishioners and property of the St.Mary’s Orthodox Church, Ayur for conducting the main festival scheduled to be celebrated from

4^th to 15^th August, 2024 with various events.

d. Issue a direction to the second and third respondents to consider Ext.P1 and P3 complaints respectively and to act accordingly.

2. Petitioner is a Church, which is aggrieved by the conduct of respondents 4 and 5, who attempted to disrupt the religious services of the Church as well as the festival that was proposed in the month of August, 2024.

3. Pleadings in the writ petition reveal that, on account of a personal rivalry with the Vicar of the church, respondents 4 and 5 started resorting to illegal activities including assaulting and manhandling some of the parish members, and created an atmosphere of terror in the Church. Respondents 4 and 5 are also alleged to have manhandled the altar boys who assist the priest during religious services and even threatened the Managing Committee Members and the Vicar from conducting church worship. It was in the above circumstances that this writ petition was filed.

4. Though notice to respondents 4 and 5 have been served, there is no appearance on their behalf.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even after filing of this writ petition, respondents 4 and 5 have resorted to taking law into their hands and assaulted several parishioners and committee members including the Vicar. The said respondents have also defamed the Vicar and other committee members by uploading distorted content on social media. It was also submitted that as per Ext.P5 letter, the family of the 4^th respondent had resigned from the church membership and the same has even been accepted.

6. On a consideration of the submissions made across the Bar, and also having heard the learned Government Pleader, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of with a direction.

7. Since respondents 4 and 5 are alleged to have caused disturbances to the religious worship conducted in the Church, police intervention may be necessary whenever intimation is given. No person, even if he is a member of the Church, can be permitted to interfere with or disturb the religious worship being performed in a Church. If any person attacks the Priest or the Managing Committee Members during their function as Vicar of the Church or Managing Committee Members necessarily such instances should be prevented.

8. Though the 4^th respondent is alleged to have resigned, petitioner still apprehends possible disturbances.

In view of the above, there will be a direction to the third respondent to provide adequate and effective police protection to the Vicar of the petitioner as well as the Managing Committee Members to effectively carry on the religious services without any interfer