Permission For Religious Ceremonies Can't Be Denied On Sole Ground That Other Communities Are In Majority There: Supreme Court To TN Govt

While hearing a writ petition against an alleged embargo by the Tamil Nadu government on live screenings and special poojas in connection with the Ram Mandir 'pran prathistha' ceremony, the Supreme Court cautioned against blanket orders banning religious ceremonies in areas predominantly inhabited by members of other religions.

On Monday morning, a bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta issued notice in this petition filed by a Tamil Nadu Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader alleging that the Tamil Nadu government had banned the live telecast of the Ayodhya temple ceremonies and the conduct of poojas, annadanams and bhajans to mark the occassion of its consecration, slated to take place later in the day. The court also recorded the statement made on behalf of the Tamil Nadu government, which insisted that no such bans were in operation in the state. "We believe and trust that the authorities will act in accordance with the law and not on the basis of any oral instructions," the bench observed in its order. 

During the brief courtroom exchange, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that the State was stopping screenings of the 'pran pratistha', even in private temples and urged the top court to send a strong message against this. The law officer also argued that no religious activity may be disallowed in the absence of any real apprehension, pointing to an order rejecting an application on grounds that members of another religions live in a particular area.

Justice Khanna said in response, "We have asked the authorities to pass a speaking order giving reasons. Let the reasons come on record. We are living in a society where there are homogenous communities. But do not prevent [religious activities] only on the ground that A community or B community is living in a particular region. If there is any law and order situation, the application may be rejected. But not this. We will know exactly how many applications you have allowed, and how many have been rejected."

Justice Datta also reasoned that if such an order, banning religious processions and other ceremonies in areas inhabited primarily by members of one religion, were implemented across the state, then religions that are a numeric minority in an area would never be allowed to hold prayer meetings there. Criticising the order that the solicitor general had mentioned, the judge also said, "The reason provided in this order is that Hindus are in the minorities here, and if they are allowed to hold prayer meetings, that will cause problems in the society. Is this a reason?"

Tamil Nadu Additional Advocate General Amit Anand Tiwari attempted to explain, "It is actually related to the law and order situation. Suppose they want to carry out a procession in front of a mosque..."

"You regulate it then! You have the powers to regulate these processions by passing orders," Justice Datta exclaimed.

Before adjourning the hearing, Justice Khanna repeated that no application ought to be rejected on this ground alone. "We are making it very clear that applications are not to be rejected for this reason," he said.

Case Details

Vinoj v. Union of India & Ors. | Diary No. 3390 of 2024

Click here to read the order