Kantaru Rajeevaru vs Indian Young Lawyers Association Thr. Its General Secretary

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2019 Supreme(SC) 1260

ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN, D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, RANJAN GOGOI, A. M. KHANWILKAR, INDU MALHOTRA
Kantaru Rajeevaru – Appellant
Versus
Indian Young Lawyers Association Thr. Its General Secretary – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner(s):J. Sai Deepak, Suvidutt M.S., Anu B., Radhika Menon, Ankit Tripathy, Avinash Sharma, Smita Pandey, Yogesh Sikri, Petitioner-in-person M. T. George, Prachi Bajpai, K. V. Muthu Kumar, M. A. Chinnasamy, C. Rubavathi, P. Raja Ram, V. Senthil Kumar, Jose Abraham, Biju P Raman, Gopal Sankara Narayanan, Aswathi M.k., A.C. Philip, Rabin Majumder, Kylashnatha Pillay, Rashmi Singhania, Sarad Kumar Singhani, Rashmi Singhania, Renjith B. Marar, Lakshmi N. Kaimal, Mahendra Kumawat, P.R. Kovilan, Geetha Kovilan, Lakshmi, Anil V. Katarki, Anil C. Nishani, P. Prasanna Kumar, L. Chandrashekar, S. Kiran Kumar, T. R. B. Sivakumar, K. V. Mohan, K.V. Balakrishnan, Rahul Kumar Sharma, Anoop Prakash Awasthi, G. Sivabalamurugan, Dr. K.P. Kylasanatha Pillay, V.S. Lakshmi, Bhavanishankar Gadnis, Vishwanath Gadnis, S.M. Popli, A. Venayagam Balan, P. S. Sudheer, Rishi Maheshwari, Mayuri Nayyar Chawla, Anne Mathew, Bharat Sood, Shruti Jose, C.R. Jaya Sukin, Baby Devi Bonia, Divya Mishra, Savita Devi, Ashutosh Kumar Yadav, K.R. Satheesh, Rajiv Kumar Sinha, Rahul Sharma, Tarun Kant Samantaray, Surajita Pattanaik, Karri Venkata Reddy, Narender Kumar Verma, Shekhar Naphade, B. Vinodh Khanna, Sayooj Mohandas M., Seemant Kumar, V. Abhilash M.R., Vishal Arun, Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Piyush Dwivedi, Akanksha Mehra, Malini Poduval, Vishnu Shankar Jain, Anish R. Shah, Venkataramani, Ranbir Singh Yadav, Ritu Reniwal, T. G. Narayanan Nair, Dr. K.P. Kylasanatha Pillay, Mohan Parasaran, P. V. Yogeswaran, Ashish Kr. Upadhyay, Sridhar Potaraju, Y. Lokesh, Babul Kumar, P. Abinesh Karthik, Arun Singh, V. Keerthana, Nachiketa Joshi, Jitendra Kumar Tripathi, Gunratan Pandey, Gopal Jha, Shishir Pinaki, Rajiv Kumar Sinha, Sajith. P, R. Venkataramani, Anzu. K. Varkey, N.P. Rakeesh Panicker, B. Rajesh, Siva Kumar A., Yashraj Singh Bundela, V. Shyamohan, V. K. Biju, Shaji George, Abhay Pratap Singh, Jawahar Lal Singh, Kuriakose Varghese, Abir Phukan, V. Shyamohan, Surya Prakash, for Kmnp Law Ranjan Kumar, Deepak Prabhakaran, Prakash Gautam, Ajay Kumar Pandey, Sanjay Tyagi, Rajesh Kr. Singh, Shymal Kumar, Savita Singh, Sujeet Kumar, G.R. Pandey, Jitendra Kr. Tripathi, Amit Kumar, Sandeep Singh, Rajesh Kr. C., Dinesh Kumar, Santosh Kumar Pandey, V. Giri, Krishna Kumar Singh, Mohammad Sadique T.A., Svadha Shankar, Amrith Krishnan, K. Rajeev, Ramesh Babu M. R., Chandy Oommen, Swati Setia, Gopal Sankara Narayan, Ravindra Srivastav, M.K.S. Menon, Usha Nandini. V, Biju P. Raman, Vishnu Shankar, Athira G.N., Tom Joseph, Balaji V., S. Beno Bencigar, Parijat Kishore, Shobha Ramamoorthy, Shantanu Jugtawat, Mukesh Kumar Singh, V. Balaji, Purushottam Sharma Tripathi, Amit, Sagar Kumar, Ikshit Singhal, P. Munisubramanian, for M/s. Mukesh Kumar Singh And Co. Deepak Anand, Debasis Misra, Jagdev, Suhas Kadam, R.C. Paul Kanakraj, Pareena Swarup, Dr. Sanatan Ray Choudhari, M.K. Vinayak, Binay Kumar Jha, Vishaal S. Jogdand, Nanita Sharma, Manav, R. Sharath, Alpana Sharma, Choudhari Samsuddin Khan, Jay Prakash Somani, Meera Bhatia, Renjith B. Marar, Lakshmi N. Kaimal, Manoj C. Nair, Robin Khokhar, Kumar Gaurav, B.N. Dubey, Ritu Reniwal, A. Raghunath, Sanand Ramakrishnan, Abhilash M.R., Sayooj Mohandas M., Nishe Rajen Shonker, Advocates
For the Respondent(s):Indira Jaising, Prasanth P., Nehmat Kaur, Ajita Sharma, Paras Nath Singh, P.B. Suresh, Venkita Subramoniam T.R., Likhi Chand Bonsel, Rahat Bansal, P. V. Dinesh, Sindhu T.P., Mukund P. Unny, Bineesh K., Ashwini Kumar Singh, P.V. Surendranath, Resmitha R. Chandran, Lekha Sudhakran, Sawan Kumar Shukla, A. Rajarajan, L. Vasuki Rajarajan, R. Suryanar Maheshan, Ravi Prakash Gupta, Anubhav, G. Prakash, Jishnu M.L., Priyanka Prakash, Beena Prakash, Advocates

Judgement Key Points

Certainly! Please provide the legal document content so I can analyze it and generate the key points with the appropriate references.

JUDGMENT :

RANJAN GOGOI, CJI.

1. Ordinarily, review petitions ought to proceed on the principle predicated in Order XLVII in Part IV of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013. However, along with review petitions several fresh writ petitions have been filed as a fall out of the judgment under review. All these petitions were heard together in the open Court.

2. The endeavour of the petitioners is to resuscitate the debate about – what is essentially religious, essential to religion and integral part of the religion. They would urge that ‘Religion’ is a means to express ones ‘Faith’. In the Indian context, given the plurality of religions, languages, cultures and traditions, what is perceived as faith and essential practices of the religion for a particular deity by a section of the religious group, may not be so perceived (as an integral part of the religion) by another section of the same religious group for the same deity in a temple at another location. Both sections of the same religious group have a right to freely profess, practise and propagate their religious beliefs as being integral part of their religion by virtue of Article 25 of the Constitution of India. It matters not that they

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2019 Supreme(SC) 1260

ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN, D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, RANJAN GOGOI, A. M. KHANWILKAR, INDU MALHOTRAKantaru Rajeevaru – AppellantVersusIndian Young Lawyers Association Thr. Its General Secretary – Respondent

Cases Referred (20)

ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN, D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, RANJAN GOGOI, A. M. KHANWILKAR, INDU MALHOTRA
Kantaru Rajeevaru – Appellant
Versus
Indian Young Lawyers Association Thr. Its General Secretary – Respondent