'Act Of High Religious Worship' : Madras High Court Allows Ritual Of Devotee Rolling Over Plaintain Leaves On Which Food Was Eaten By Others

“If the right to privacy includes sexual and gender orientation, it certainly includes one's spiritual orientation also. It is open to a person to express this orientation in the manner he deems fit. Of course, it should not affect the rights and freedoms belonging to others. So long as this rubicon is not crossed, it is not open to the State or the Courts to impinge on one's action,” the court observed.

Justice GR Swaminathan thus observed that a man had every right to perform Angapradakshinam, a ritual where one rolls over the plantain leaves left behind by other devotees after eating. The court noted that his right to perform the practice was protected under Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b), 21 and 25(1) of the Constitution.

“It is not open to the court to challenge the belief entertained by the petitioner as regards the spiritual efficacy of the practice….Performing angapradakshinam on banana leaves after the guests have eaten is an act of high religious worship by Sri Sadasiva Brahmendral's devotees. This right is protected by Part III of the Constitution of India [Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 19(1)(d), 21 and Article 25(1)],” the court said.

Background

In 2015, a single judge of the Madras High Court directed the authorities to not let anyone perform the Angapradakshan. The single judge had noted that though the court had its own limitations to interfere in religious practices and customs, no human being could be allowed to be degraded by following any practice or custom in the name of religion.

The petitioner in the present case, who wanted to perform the angapradakshinam had thus approached the court seeking permission for the same. While he argued that he should be allowed to exercise his fundamental right to practice religion, the authorities informed the court that their hands were tied in view of the earlier judgment.

Looking into the earlier judicial pronouncements regarding religious practices, the court said that the petitioner had a guaranteed fundamental right under Article 25(1) of the Constitution to carry out the religious vow undertaken by him when he believed that such an act would confer a spiritual benefit on him.

Right To Privacy

The court noted that the matter was also covered by the right to privacy. The court added that one's personal choices governing the way of life were intrinsic to privacy and that privacy was not lost or surrendered merely because the individual was in a public place.

The court also added that the right to move freely throughout the country envisaged under Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution was not confined to walking or vehicular transportation but would also include angapradakshinam.

The court also opined that the petitioner's prayer was unnecessary as he did not need permission to conduct the customary religious event. The court added that the petitioner could perform the angapradakshinam and the authorities could not interfere with the same. The court further added that if there was any obstruction, it was the duty of the police to aid the petitioner in exercising his fundamental right and remove the obstructions.

Earlier Order of Madras High Court

Regarding the earlier high court order which had prevented the practice, the court noted that the said ordersuffered from the fatal vice of non-joinder of necessary parties as the devotees were not impleaded in a representative capacity.

The court noted that the single judge had issued directions to the authorities to not permit rolling over on the plantain leaves behind the back of the devotees and the trustees of the temple who were not put on notice or given an opportunity to place their case.

The court also noted that Article 17 of the Constitution was wrongly applied to the petition on the belief that persons belonging to other communities rolled over on the used plantain leaves left behind by Brahmins. The court observed that even according to the District Administration, the devotees, irrespective of their community performed the Angapradakshinam. The court added that the custom pointed to communal amity and social integration.

The court thus allowed the petition and restrained the authorities from interfering with the conduct of angapradakshinam.

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr.T.Vilavankothai, Additional Government Pleader, Mr.C.Christopher, Mr.A.Albert James, Government Advocate (crl.side)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 204