DATE OF JUDGEMENT:
30 April 2021
JUDGES:
Justice N. Kirubakaran, Justice P. Velmurugan
PARTIES:
Mr.G.Karthikeyan(Plaintiff)
Mr.J.Pothiraj and Ors. (Respondent)
SUMMARY
The following judgement deals with the religious conflict between the two religious groups comprised of Hindus and Muslims. The conflict was related to the conduct of religious procession in the disputed site. Hence, in the said matter, the appeal was dismissed.
AN OVERVIEW
1. The appeal has been raised against the order passed by the learned single Judge by which the learned Judge had modified conditions No.1 to 3 and 6 to 8 contained in the order passed.
2. There was a disputed site comprised in S.F.No.119/1in the V. Kalathur Village, Veppanthatai Taluk, Perambalur District due to which proceedings were raised. V.Kalathur Village consists of both Muslims as well as Hindus.
3. From the year 1951 onwards, there is a dispute between these two religious groups regarding the usage of ninty-six cents of Government Poramboke land inS.F.No.119/1.
4. The reason for the clash between these two religious groups is that the Hindus claim long use of Poramboke land and objected tocommon usageon the other handMuslims wanted the land to be used as commonplace. Because of this, numerous conflicts occurred between the two religious groups as to the said site,pursuant to which numerous cases were also filed against both the groups.
5. There was no issue regarding the conduct of certain Hindu festivals or celebrations, and three days celebrations of the three temples were calmly led till the year 2011.Just from the year 2012 onwards, the Muslims began objecting to some of the Hindu celebrations naming them as Sins and arguing that the areas were overwhelmed by the Muslim population.
6. Between 2012 and 2015, the celebrations set, in any case, with limitations set up by the Court through different orders, considering the petitions filed objecting to the conduct of the celebrations. Further, in the year 2018, an order was passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer permitting which, as a result, permitted the conduct of the celebrations, subject to specific conditions, and these conditions were challenged in the High Court.
7. The present appeal in the Madras High Court is about the permitting celebrations with certain conditions, however, these were challenged before the Division Bench.
IMPORTANT PROVISION
Constitution of India:
- Section 144 of theCode of Criminal Procedure
- Section 180-A of the District Municipalities Act
ISSUES
The major issue concerned in this case-
- Whether the appeal is maintainable or not?
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT
1. On the onset, the Court observed that according to Section 180-A of the District Municipalities Act 1920, streets or roads ought to be utilized as admittance to individuals regardless of their religion, caste, or creed.
2. Whenever it has been proclaimed by the specialists as roads or streets as per Section 180-A of the District Municipalities Act, the roads and streets, which are "secular", ought to be utilized as roads by all the people irrespective of their religion, caste, or creed.
3. Any procession including the religious procession will be conducted through all the roads and streets without any restriction. Each religious group has got fundamental right to take out a religious procession through all the roads without insulting the other religious sentiments, public law, and order.
4. Just in light of the fact that there is one place of worship belonging to another religious group, the equivalent can't be a ground to decline or deny authorization to conduct procession of other religions to go through those streets or roads.
CONCLUSION
The Court held that the appeal had filed and was thus dismissed along with connected miscellaneous petitions. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, there was no order as to costs.
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
