Plea to conduct 10-day Brahmotsavam festival at Ramanathaswamy Temple
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Tuesday directed the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department to file a counter affidavit to a public interest litigation petition that sought a direction to authorities to conduct the Brahmotsavam festival at Ramanathaswamy Temple in Rameswaram for 10 days instead of three days.
A Division Bench of Justices S.M. Subramaniam and A.D. Maria Clete was hearing the petition filed by an advocate Elephant Rajendran of Chennai. The petitioner said that Brahmotsavam festival is conducted in all temples in the State. However, it was not conducted for 10 years in Ramanathaswamy temple in Rameswaram.
The Brahmotsavam festival is conducted for 10 days. However, this year it is going to be held for only three days. The modification of the ancient temple practice is hurting the religious sentiments of the devotees, he said.
The Brahmotsavam festival should be conducted for 10 days instead of three days. The petition was filed seeking relief in ensuring the age-old traditions of the temple were not tampered with, he said.
He said that to curtail the 10-day festival to three days was arbitrary. The authorities cannot interfere with religious affairs. He sought a direction to authorities to extend the festival by seven more days and conduct a 10-day festival at the temple.
During the course of the hearing, the temple authorities submitted that the Brahmotsavam festival had already commenced on June 3 and the authorities will take a decision with regard to conducting the festival for the coming years. The court posted the matter for hearing after two weeks.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
3 hours ago
- India Today
Madras High Court says same-sex couples can form family without marriage
The Madras High Court held that same-sex couples can indeed form a family, even though same-sex marriages are yet to be legally recognised in court made this observation while allowing a habeas corpus petition filed by a woman seeking the release of her 25-year-old partner, who had been forcibly detained by her birth family.A division bench of Justices GR Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayanan ruled in favour of the couple, asserting that 'marriage is not the sole mode to found a family.'advertisement 'To a specific question from us, the detenue replied that she is a lesbian and in a relationship with the writ petitioner,' the court noted. The woman stated she had been beaten and subjected to rituals aimed at making her 'normal.' She expressed fear for her life and told the court she wished to be with the the petitioner had described herself merely as a 'close friend' in her police complaint, the court said it understood the hesitation, acknowledging that same-sex relationships still face societal bench cited the Supreme Court's rulings in NALSA and Navtej Johar, affirming that sexual orientation is a matter of personal autonomy and dignity protected under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court also referenced a previous ruling by Justice Anand Venkatesh in Prasanna J vs. S Sushma, where a 'Deed of Familial Association' between LGBTQIA+ partners was approved, recognising civil concept of a 'chosen family' is now well settled and acknowledged in LGBTQIA+ jurisprudence,' the bench observed. 'The petitioner and the detenue can very well constitute a family.'The court ordered the immediate release of the woman, restrained her birth family from interfering in her personal liberty, and directed the police to provide protection to both women as and when required.
NDTV
5 hours ago
- NDTV
"Same-Sex Couple Can Very Well Form A Family": Madras High Court
Chennai: Though the Supreme Court may not have legalised marriage between same sex couples, they can very well form a family, the Madras High Court has held and allowed a young woman to join her female partner and said the two women can constitute a family. A division bench of Justices G R Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayanan said the expression "family" has to be understood in an expanded sense. Hearing a writ petition seeking to produce before court a 25-year old woman and set her at liberty, the bench said: "To a specific question from us, the detenue (the 25-year old woman) replied that she is a lesbian and in relationship with the writ petitioner." "She made it clear to the court that she wanted to go with the petitioner. She confirmed the allegation that she is being detained against her will by her natal family. It appeared that she was forcibly taken to her home and beaten. She told us that her natal family members forced her to undergo certain rituals so that she will become "normal". She even apprehended danger to her life. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner has nowhere described the true nature of her relationship with the detenue. Even in her complaint to the police, the petitioner called herself as the detenue's close friend. We can understand the hesitation on her part," the court said. Further, the court said: "While Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty Vs Union of India (Supreme Court) may not have legalised marriage between same sex couples, they can very well form a family. Marriage is not the sole mode to found a family." The concept of "chosen family" is now well settled and acknowledged in LGBTQIA jurisprudence, the court said, adding the petitioner and the detenue can very well constitute a family. Justice Anand Venkatesh, Judge of Madras HC, in Prasanna J Vs S Sushma approved a "Deed of familial Association" that purported to recognise the civil union entered into between LGBTQAI partners. The Supreme Court, in NALSA and Navtej Johar case, declared that sexual orientation is a matter of individual choice and that it is one of the most basic aspects of self-determination, dignity and freedom. It is an integral part of personal autonomy and self-expression and falls within the realm of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. The High Court, in its judgment dated May 22, 2025 said: "Since we have satisfied ourselves that the detenue wants to join the petitioner and that she is being detained against her will, we allow this Habeas Corpus petition and set her at liberty. We also restrain the detenue's natal family members from interfering with her personal liberty." Also, the court directed the police to provide protection to the detenue as well as the petitioner as and when required. (Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
Time of India
6 hours ago
- Time of India
Same sex couples can constitute a family: Madras High Court
Though the Supreme Court may not have legalised marriage between same sex couples , they can very well form a family, the Madras High Court has held and allowed a young woman to join her female partner and said the two women can constitute a family. A division bench of Justices G R Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayanan said the expression "family" has to be understood in an expanded sense. Hearing a writ petition seeking to produce before court a 25-year old woman and set her at liberty, the bench said: "To a specific question from us, the detenue (the 25-year old woman) replied that she is a lesbian and in relationship with the writ petitioner." She made it clear to the court that she wanted to go with the petitioner. She confirmed the allegation that she is being detained against her will by her natal family. "It appeared that she was forcibly taken to her home and beaten. She told us that her natal family members forced her to undergo certain rituals so that she will become "normal". She even apprehended danger to her life." In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner has nowhere described the true nature of her relationship with the detenue." Even in her complaint to the police, the petitioner called herself as the detenue's close friend. We can understand the hesitation on her part." Live Events Further, the court said: "While Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty Vs Union of India (Supreme Court) may not have legalised marriage between same sex couples, they can very well form a family. Marriage is not the sole mode to found a family." The concept of "chosen family" is now well settled and acknowledged in LGBTQIA+ jurisprudence, the court said adding the petitioner and the detenue can very well constitute a family. Justice Anand Venkatesh, Judge of Madras HC, in Prasanna J Vs S Sushma approved a "Deed of familial Association" that purported to recognise the civil union entered into between LGBTQAI+ partners. The Supreme Court, in NALSA and Navtej Johar case, declared that sexual orientation is a matter of individual choice and that it is one of the most basic aspects of self-determination, dignity and freedom. It is an integral part of personal autonomy and self-expression and falls within the realm of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. The High Court, in its judgment dated May 22, 2025 said: "Since we have satisfied ourselves that the detenue wants to join the petitioner and that she is being detained against her will, we allow this Habeas Corpus petition and set her at liberty. We also restrain the detenue's natal family members from interfering with her personal liberty." Also, the court directed the police to provide protection to the detenue as well as the petitioner as and when required. Economic Times WhatsApp channel )
