Permission of authorities not required to conduct village temple festivals: Madurai Bench of Madras- The New Indian Specific

By Specific Information Service

MADURAI: Observing that the Structure of India offers its residents with the precise to peaceable meeting and freely practise faith, the Madurai Bench of Madras Excessive Court docket held on Tuesday that permission from authorities shouldn’t be required to conduct temple festivals in villages.

Justice GR Swaminathan acknowledged so whereas listening to a petition filed by P Seeni of Virudhunagar, requesting the court docket to direct the Virudhunagar district administration and police to grant permission to the residents of Valayapatti village in Thiruchuzhi to conduct the Pongal pageant in two temples within the village on August 19 and 20.

Justice Swaminathan referred to a couple judgments handed by the Supreme Court docket and the Excessive Court docket through which it had been held that performing previous customs and spiritual practices are one’s basic rights and the federal government equipment can’t intrude with them underneath mere apprehensions.

He additionally defined Part 42-A of the Tamil Nadu District Police Act, 1859 and Part 41 of the Chennai Metropolis Police Act, particularly how the latter was mentioned by a Division Bench of the Madras Excessive Court docket in 1959 case filed by former chief minister CN Annadurai. “The Division Bench held that non secular conferences may be held with out taking any permission in any respect,” the decide famous.

After all, the authorities can’t stay a silent spectator if there’s a breach of public tranquillity, Justice Swaminathan clarified. “If a risk to the upkeep of regulation and order is imminent, then additionally the chief Justice of the Peace or the police are sure to intervene. As long as there isn’t a such state of affairs, the authorities haven’t any position within the matter,” he added. Since Seeni’s petition pertained to a pageant that has been celebrated from time immemorial yearly in a village, no permission is required from the authorities, the decide noticed and disposed of the petition.

MADURAI: Observing that the Structure of India offers its residents with the precise to peaceable meeting and freely practise faith, the Madurai Bench of Madras Excessive Court docket held on Tuesday that permission from authorities shouldn’t be required to conduct temple festivals in villages. Justice GR Swaminathan acknowledged so whereas listening to a petition filed by P Seeni of Virudhunagar, requesting the court docket to direct the Virudhunagar district administration and police to grant permission to the residents of Valayapatti village in Thiruchuzhi to conduct the Pongal pageant in two temples within the village on August 19 and 20. Justice Swaminathan referred to a couple judgments handed by the Supreme Court docket and the Excessive Court docket through which it had been held that performing previous customs and spiritual practices are one’s basic rights and the federal government equipment can’t intrude with them underneath mere apprehensions. He additionally defined Part 42-A of the Tamil Nadu District Police Act, 1859 and Part 41 of the Chennai Metropolis Police Act, particularly how the latter was mentioned by a Division Bench of the Madras Excessive Court docket in 1959 case filed by former chief minister CN Annadurai. “The Division Bench held that non secular conferences may be held with out taking any permission in any respect,” the decide famous. After all, the authorities can’t stay a silent spectator if there’s a breach of public tranquillity, Justice Swaminathan clarified. “If a risk to the upkeep of regulation and order is imminent, then additionally the chief Justice of the Peace or the police are sure to intervene. As long as there isn’t a such state of affairs, the authorities haven’t any position within the matter,” he added. Since Seeni’s petition pertained to a pageant that has been celebrated from time immemorial yearly in a village, no permission is required from the authorities, the decide noticed and disposed of the petition.