Public Utilities Near Hanuman Temple For Benefit Of Devotees, Not Detrimental To Atmosphere & Ecological Balance: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Recently, Madhya Pradesh High Court refused to interfere in the construction of public utility premises by the Municipal Corporation near a Hanuman Mandir in Narsinghpur. The court reasoned that the construction of Shauchalaya is for the benefit of devotees; such constructions cannot be termed as detrimental to the atmosphere of the temple and ecological balance.
The single-judge bench of Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia also added that the court couldn't decipher the intent of the petitioner with a clear criminal history, seeking a direction to restrain the municipal authorities from carrying out further construction of the public utility premises.
“…Since the public utility premises are being constructed for the benefit of the devotees as well as for keeping the area surrounding the Hanuman Temple clean and hygienic, this Court is of considered opinion that no case is made out warranting interference”, the bench sitting at Jabalpur held.
The court also observed that the petitioner, Kapil Kumar Dubey, couldn't apprise the court about the actual distance between the temple and the premises under construction.
The counsel appearing for the state had contended that Dubey was awarded life imprisonment apart from indictments in an N.D.P.S case and for an offence falling under Section 354 IPC (Section 74 of BNS, 2023). In addition to that, he is also the accused in 17 criminal cases, the state's advocate emphasized.
According to the state, Municipal Council Gadarwara, District Narsinghpur aimed at keeping the surroundings of the temple clean and hygienic by constructing a Sulabh Shauchalaya. However, the counsel appearing for Dubey iterated that constructing a public utility premise would spoil the atmosphere around Hanuman temple, and sought a direction in the nature of mandamus to halt construction works.
“Construction of public utility premises for the benefit of the devotees cannot be said to be an activity detrimental to the atmosphere and ecological balance….” the single judge bench added while dismissing the petition.
Advocate B.P. Patel appeared for the petitioner. Dy. Advocate General Swapnil Ganguly represented the respondent state.
Case Title: Kapil Kumar Dubey v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
Case No: Writ Petition No. 17904 of 2024