No person can deny access to a temple based on caste: HC
Madras high court
, while holding that no person or group can deny access to a public temple based on caste.
Justice B Pugalendhi observed that a petition filed by Vanniyakulachathiriyar Nala Arakattalai, represented by its president Murugan, seeks the removal of a prohibitory order of 2018 and permission to resume festivals and worship at the Mariamman temple in Chinna Dharapuram, Karur district. According to the trust, no caste discrimination has occurred at the temple. However, another petitioner, Marimuthu, alleges that scheduled caste devotees are not being allowed to worship.
The judge took note of the report filed by the Karur district collector stating that the temple has remained closed since 2018, except for pujas, due to apprehension of communal tension and the risk of law and order disturbances. Condemning the report, the judge observed that the closure of a public temple, under the guise of a law and order concern, is a dereliction of constitutional duty. The collector cannot escape his duty by simply saying there may be trouble.
It is his responsibility to handle it using the state machinery.
"Police seem to think that the only way to keep peace is by denying entry to everyone. This is wrong," the judge observed.
It is also the duty of the HR and CE department and the state to ensure that everyone is allowed to worship and there is no caste-based exclusion. The judge then directed the department to file a report.
The judge directed both parties to cooperate with the officials and maintain peace and harmony.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
3 hours ago
- Indian Express
‘No arrest, only lawful document verification': Odisha Advocate General tells Calcutta HC on migrant detentions
The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday asked the Advocate General of Odisha to submit an affidavit on the alleged detention of Bengali-speaking migrant workers who had travelled to the state for work. The division bench of Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty and Justice Reetobroto Kumar Mitra asked, 'Apprise us whether they were arrested, interrogated, or detained.' The Advocate General of Odisha, appearing virtually, denied any arrest. According to the petitioners' counsel, those detained were allegedly released only after the court intervened. Raghunath Chakraborty, appearing for the petitioners, said, 'The detention was illegal and thus compensation should be provided. Those who have been released have stated that many others like them remain in custody — detained illegally and not produced before a magistrate.' 'There have been no arrests. As per the Foreigners Act, 1946, Section 3, when the citizenship of suspected persons is in doubt, we investigate for lawful verification of documents. People from all over the country come to work here, and lawfully, on suspicion, their documents are verified,' the Odisha Advocate General submitted. Senior counsel Kalyan Banerjee, appearing for the petitioners, argued, 'There must be some grounds. Only on suspicion, they cannot declare someone a foreigner.' After hearing all parties, the court directed the Odisha government to submit its affidavit in opposition by August 20. The petitioners were directed to file replies by August 27, and the matter will be taken up on August 29. The court also directed Advocate General Ashok Kumar Acharya to be present in person for the next hearing. The court is hearing two habeas corpus petitions filed earlier this month against Odisha Police, accusing it of illegally detaining Bengali-speaking migrant workers. One of the petitions was filed by Nasima Mondal, mother of Rakhibul Islam Mondal who is a resident of Hariharpara in Murshidabad and was allegedly detained in Odisha's Jagatsinghpur district. She moved the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, claiming her son was held for more than 24 hours without being produced before a magistrate in violation of his fundamental rights. According to her petition, police allegedly picked up Rakhibul during an identity verification drive on June 25 and 'ignored valid documents' in his possession — including Aadhaar, voter ID, and ration card. The petitioner alleged he was targeted for speaking Bengali and suspected of being Bangladeshi, without any proper identity checks. Another petition was filed by Rajjak Sheikh, also from Hariharpara, seeking the release of his son, Sainur Islam. He claimed Jagatsinghpur police detained his son during a similar identity verification drive on June 30.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
4 hours ago
- Business Standard
PM Modi pays tributes to freedom fighters Tilak, Azad on birth anniversary
Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Wednesday paid rich tributes to noted freedom fighters Bal Gangadhar Tilak and Chandra Shekhar Azad on their birth anniversary, recalling their role in India's Independence. "Remembering Lokmanya Tilak on his birth anniversary. He was a pioneering leader who played a vital role in kindling the spirit of India's freedom movement with unwavering conviction," Modi said on X. Tilak's efforts to popularise the nationalist movement had earned him the title Lokmanya (the leader of people). A scholar, his slogan "Swaraj (independence) is my birthright and I will have it" struck a chord with the masses. Modi added, "He was also an outstanding thinker who believed in the power of knowledge and serving others." Paying tributes to Azad, a revolutionary freedom fighter, Modi said he epitomised unparalleled valour and grit. He said, "His role in India's quest for freedom is deeply valued and motivates our youth to stand up for what is just, with courage and conviction." Azad was part of the revolutionary movement against the British rule and is believed to have turned his pistol on himself during an encounter with police, staying true to his vow of being never captured by colonial rulers. He was only 24 at the time of his death. He along with Bhagat Singh are the most iconic revolutionary figures in popular consciousness, played on screen in various films and serials. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Hans India
6 hours ago
- Hans India
Cash row: CJI Gavai likely to recuse from hearing Justice Varma's plea, assures urgent hearing
The Supreme Court on Wednesday hinted that the Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai-led Bench will not likely take up for hearing the plea filed by Justice Yashwant Varma challenging his indictment by the three-member in-house committee in the cash-discovery episode. This unfolded when senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Justice Varma, urged CJI Gavai to constitute a Bench for urgent hearing of the matter. At this, CJI Gavai said, 'I think that it may not be proper for me to pick up that matter because I was part of the conversation'. However, the CJI assured Sibal that a Bench will be constituted to hear the plea filed by Justice Varma. 'We will just take a call and constitute a Bench,' said CJI Gavai. The writ petition filed by Justice Varma sought to quash the communication forwarded by then CJI Sanjiv Khanna to the President and then Prime Minister to take action against Justice Varma. As per the petition, the in-house panel acted in a 'pre-determined manner' and denied Justice Varma a fair opportunity to defend himself. On Monday, 145 MPs from both the ruling and Opposition parties submitted an impeachment notice against Justice Varma to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla. Justice Varma has been in the eye of a storm since the March 14 discovery of the burnt cash in an outhouse of his official residence allotted to him while serving in the Delhi High Court. Following the cash-discovery row, which sent shockwaves across the judicial corridors, Justice Varma was repatriated to the Allahabad High Court, and an in-house probe was set up to probe the allegations. According to the probe committee, both direct and electronic evidence confirmed that the storeroom was under the covert or active control of Justice Varma and his family. By way of strong inferential evidence, the in-house panel said the burnt cash was removed from the storeroom during the early hours of March 15. In conclusion, the three-member inquiry committee, comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, CJ G.S. Sandhawalia of the Himachal Pradesh HC and Karnataka HC's Justice Anu Sivaraman, found the allegations serious enough to merit impeachment proceedings against Justice Varma. It opined that Justice Varma's misconduct was not only proven but also grave enough to warrant his removal under Article 124(4) of the Constitution.
