Court upheld the right to worship under the Constitution, rejecting claims of community prejudice due to irrational beliefs.

(Order of the Court was made by J.Nisha Banu J.)

The petitioner Sangam has filed the writ appeal challenging the order passed by this court in W.P.No.12034 of 2025, dated 03.04.2025 along with the petition to grant leave to file the above appeal, since it was not the party to the said writ petition.

2. It is averred in the petition that the first respondent along with two others approached the petitioner's village community to install the goddess idol " Sivasakthi Dhakshiswari " , claiming that it would benefit to the village at large. The Goddess idol as projected by the first respondent would be normally installed near graveyards for performing poojas. Since such idols will not be installed inside the village, the same was opposed by the villagers. However, without considering the objections of the villagers, the said idol was installed by the first respondent in his house and he started performing poojas by offering chickens, hens and goats and he thrown out the dead heads of the offerings outside the house, which caused fear among the community. Hence, the appellant, on 24.03.2025, had given a representation to the official respondents to remove the idol from the premises of the 1st respondent. Considering their representation, the officials removed the idol. Challenging the same, the first respondent filed the above said writ petition in W.P.No.12034 of 2025, without adding this appellant as party respondent. Further, he misled this court by not disclosing the religious sentiments of the entire community and obtained the present impugned order from this court. According to the petitioner, the order passed by this court would cause severe prejudice to the rights of the petitioner's fishermen community to have a peaceful and harmonious life in the village.

Hence, this writ appeal has been filed.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and we have perused the materials on record.

4. A perusal of the materials shows that the first respondent has filed the said writ petition stating that worshipping of a goddess or god is a right available and guaranteed under the constitution of India and hence, he had installed a goddess of his choice for the exclusive worship for him and his family members and such practise of worship does in no way cause any disturbance or hindrance to any other individual. Hence, he filed the writ petition, as against the order of such removal of the goddess from his house.

5. The writ court, after hearing both the parties allowed the writ petition, observing as follows:

5. When this court posed a query as to the nature of unnatural death, it can be seen that the deaths were not unnatural death but people have died on account of disease etc. There is no registration of any case of unnatural death. As far as the belief of the people is concerned, the same cannot be countenanced by this court. The local residents' superstitions and irrational beliefs that merely because the idols of the goddess or the god is installed in the private premises these things are happening can neither be supported by any principle of bhakti nor be supported by any scientific principles. Instead of allaying their fears and creating awareness among the public that their belief is nothing but " Moodanambikai", the state and its authorities cannot be a party to such ill beliefs. Therefore, the action on the part of the respondents in removing the idols belonging to the petitioner from his own premises is without jurisdiction and unlawful"

The only contention of the petitioner is that without disclosing the religious sentiments of their community, the first respondent obtained orders from the court and such order for re-instalment of the idols caused severe prejudice to the members of the appellant. Ho