After Supreme Court, Delhi High Court Also Refuses To Hear Plea Against GNCTD Organising Ganesh Chaturthi

A Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh after hearing the petitioner remarked, "this petition has been filed without proper homework".

Advocate ML Sharma, appearing as party in person, argued that in terms of Constitutional mandate and the law laid down by the Supreme Court in SR Bomai case, the Delhi Government cannot promote religious celebrations. He submitted that India is a secular state and no government can be seen indulging in religious activities.

Sharma also alleged that the Government has been running advertisements for the past 15 days, regarding organization of the said religious celebration.

However, the Court observed that the petition has been filed hurriedly and not a single annexure was filed to prove the allegations. On Sharma's inability to show the alleged advertisements, the Court remarked,

"Do you not have a screenshot of the advertisement? All these arguments are in abstract, without any basis. We cannot do anything unless adequate material is brought on record. Not a single annexure has been filed by you."

In his plea, Sharma urged that the involvement of the State in the conduction of religious worship by running advertisements on television channels, at the cost of the state treasury, is violative to the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21, 25, and 14 of the Constitution of India. It was submitted that the Ganesh Chaturthi celebration by the State attacks the basic structure of secularism, resulting in a serious injury to the constitutional mandate to the citizen of India.

Referring to advertisements allegedly being run by the Delhi Government on CNBC channel, Sharma submitted that a state could not promote/ conduct religious activity. He prayed to declare that the impugned religious promotion by the Delhi Government is illegal and amounts to criminal breach of trust.

"A state has no religion," he said.

The plea was finally dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to file afresh, before the appropriate forum with proper averments, allegations, and annexures.

He had argued before the Supreme Court on Wednesday that the State being secular in character, cannot engage in religious activity. He has submitted, "State Government cannot perform Ganesh Chaturthi, individuals can. Religion is for all, not for one," he had said.

A Bench comprising CJI Ramana, Justice Surya Kant, and Justice Bopanna had however refused to interfere and asked him to approach the High Court.

Case Title: Manohar Lal Sharma v. Union of India

(Compiled by Shrutika Pandey)