Unveiling Adi Shankaracharya's Statue In Kedarnath | 'Live Telecast Of PM's Speech In TN Temples Not For Political Purpose': Madras High Court

Today, Madras High Court has heard a batch of writ petitions filed in public interest seeking various directions to the HR & CE Department for correcting the alleged lapses in the administration of temples.

One of the major issues was an allegation pertaining to the live telecast of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's speech from Kedarnath in 16 TN Temples on the occasion of dedicating the rebuilt samadhi of Adi Shankaracharya.

All the PILs were filed by Rangarajan Narasimhan from Srirangam. The matters came up before the first bench of Chief Justice Munishwar Nath Bhandari and Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy.

In the writ petition with the prayer for banning political meetings to push partisan agendas inside temple complexes, the petitioner submitted before the bench that he had previously given a representation to the Government to prohibit such meetings and live telecasts in temples.

Narasimhan primarily contended that the respondents must be prevented from hosting gatherings that are of a political nature since the recognised religious practises and Agama Sastras prohibit such meetings.

While arguing, the petitioner also heavily relied on the Religious Institutions (Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1988 (hereinafter 'Act') to support his contentions. Reliance was placed on Sections 3-5 of the said Act.

Section 3 of the Act prohibits the use of religious institutions for certain purposes including promotion of political activity, harbouring persons accused or convicted of acts punishable under law and storage of arms and ammunitions etc. Despite such specific prohibition, HR & CE Department has endorsed propagation of political schemes by different parties, he submitted.

Section 6 of the Act also prohibits any ceremony, festival, congregation, procession or assembly organised or held under its auspices to be used for any political activity.

The petitioner also made a specific reference to the respondent department permitting the use of temples for such activities by placing before the court photographs that indicate the same.

As noted above in the court order, in one of such instances, political leaders were present in 16 temples of Tamil Nadu when the Prime Minister delivered his speech on the occasion of dedicating Adhi Shankaracharya's rebuilt Samadhi in Kedarnath. According to the petitioner, the said speech was telecasted in these 16 temples by political persons in contravention of Section 3-5 of the Act. The petitioner was also aggrieved by the exhibition of achievements by the Archaeological Survey of India  (ASI) in the temples.

The Advocate General submitted that none of the acts as alleged by the petitioner violates the provisions of the Act. The reference made by the petitioner about the photographs showing the presence of political party members were not part of any political gathering. It was on the occasion of Prime Minister Dedicating Adi Shankaracharya's Samadhi in Uttarakhand. The event was telecasted in the temples pursuant to a Government of India Order, the Advocate General clarified.

Since the major contention of the litigant was a lapse on the part of HR & CE Department to ensure strict compliance with the provisions of the Act, the court examined the issue on its merits and observed that the exhibition in temples by ASI and the telecast of the speech delivered by Prime Minister is not in contravention of Section 3.

"As far as the exhibition by Archaeological Survey of India is concerned, the said body has been entrusted with the responsibility of protecting and controlling the monuments so declared including temples. The exhibition by ASI has not contravened any provisions of the Act since it was merely projecting the efforts it has put in for such preservation", therefore, the court held that it cannot be equated with pushing of propaganda by a political party.

Afterwards, the matter of banning the sale of eatables and the alleged presence of 'restaurants' inside temples in the name of offering Prasadam was taken up.

At this juncture, Advocate General informed the court that Prasadam is sold in stalls routinely. However, the court intervened and clarified that the allegation is specifically about selling other eatables. Thereafter, the bench asked the Advocate General to file a response. Another matter pertaining to banning the plying of heavy vehicles in temples was also considered. 

"This is the last place where anyone would want the vehicles to come charging at the devotees. This is happening when people go to the temples in hope of spiritual enlightenment", the petitioner contended.

When the court asked the petitioner to take photographs as proof of the same and submit it in ten days, the petitioner remarked that he has been facing some difficulties nowadays since he was attacked at several temples for taking photographs for similar purposes.

Case Title: Rangarajan Narasimhan v. Additional Chief Secretary To Government & Ors. & Other Matters

Case No: WP 1986/ 2022 & Ors.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 56

Click Here To Read/ Download Order