Permission to hold a religious procession cannot be rejected on the grounds that the procession would pass through a place of worship of another religion or that through a place where people of another religion lived, the Supreme Court said today. 

The apex court was hearing a case filed by one Vinoj P Selvam, a BJP member, alleging that the Tamil Nadu government had passed oral orders to ban live telecast of Pran Prathishtha of the Ayodhya Ramlalla temple, holding poojas and other rituals and annadaana (free distribution of food).  

Tamil Nadu BJP leader, K Annamalai, today posted on X a conversation purported to have taken place between a lady who wanted permission to hold rituals and a police officer, who was telling her that he had received oral instructions not to allow such events. Union Finance Minister and BJP leader, Nirmala Sitaraman, also posted a video that showed some men dismantling the fixtures meant to hold a LED large-screen television set, in a temple. She said that the state government had sent plain-clothesmen to obstruct the proceedings. She also posted a letter written by Inspector of Police, Aralvoimozhi police station, which states that permission to telecast Ayodhya proceedings in the temple is denied. Some of these documents were attached by the petitioner before the Supreme Court.  

The state government denied any such oral orders. 

Amit Anand Tiwari, advocate, appearing for Tamil Nadu government said that the state had imposed no restrictions at all and called the petition “politically motivated pleas”.  

The case was heard by Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Dutta. Bar & Bench quotes Justice Datta as saying, “What kind of are given for rejection? ... How can a reason be given that Hindus are a minority at some place so you will not allow? These reasons are atrocious.” 

In their judgment, the judges say, “We believe and trust that the authorities will act in accordance with law and not on the basis of any oral instructions, which, as stated above on behalf of respondent nos. 2 to 4, have not been issued. The authorities, while examining any application for permission for procession etc., shall proceed in accordance with law and shall record reasons, if any, for rejecting the application. The authorities will maintain data regarding the applications received and the reasons given for allowing or disallowing such applications. While examining such applications, the authorities will keep the relevant parameters, as laid down by law and judgments of the Courts, in mind.” 

The judgment adds, “The reasons recorded therein are prima facie not justified and acceptable.” 

Hearing another writ petition challenging the refusal of permission by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Avadi Division, to conduct bhajan and annadanam today, Justice N Anand Venkatesh of the High Court of Madras, said that there no permission is needed for functions in private enclosures. 

Annamalai said in a message on X, that the High Court had ordered that “there shall be no restrictions to telecast the pran prathishta live on private premises.” 

He further said that “The Supreme Court has ordered that based on oral orders, fundamental rights of individuals cannot be restricted by the State govt of TN. Devotees of Bhagwan Shri Ram are free to telecast the consecration event live on an LED screen within any private premises & to give intimation only to HR&CE-administered temples. There is no ban on conducting Bhajans, offering special pooja or Annadhana.” 

Post these orders, by the two courts, there was brisk activity in many temples in the state. For example, in the Vallabha Vinayakar temple in Chennai, hundreds of devotees partook of food.  

Nirmala Sitaraman herself was present at the Sri Kamakshi Amman Temple in Kanchipuram, where there was a discourse based on Kamba Ramayanam and singing of pancharatna keerthana songs. 

 

comment COMMENT NOW