High Court rebukes caste discrimination at temple festivals, orders Dindigul Collector to investigate within 12 weeks
Madurai – In a landmark judgment, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has held that any practice or custom that excludes any class of citizens on the basis of caste from any public religious festival cannot be constitutionally valid. The Court clarified that Article 17 of the Constitution completely abolishes untouchability and this prohibition is not subject to any custom, tradition, or social acceptance.
The Bench headed by Justice L. Victoria Gauri issued these important directions while hearing a petition filed by Bakkiyaraj. Petitioner Devendra belongs to the Kula Vellalar community and alleges that during the annual festival of the Arulmighu Ayiram Aruval Kottai Karuppasamy Temple in Muthalapuram village, Nilakottai taluk, Dindigul district, a wooden casket decorated with silk cloth is prevented from entering North Street, which is dominated by his community.
Why the procession is not taken to North Street?
Petitioner Bakiyaraj Devendra, belonging to the Kula Vellalar community and a resident of Muthalapuram village’s North Street, filed a petition in the High Court, stating that the village deity is a public deity and is worshipped by people of all castes. Every year during the Thai month, a wooden casket decorated with silk cloth is taken out in a procession through the village streets. However, for the past several years, the respondents (Kumanesan, Raghupathi, Seeni, Satish, Kathinisan, and Kannan) have deliberately prevented the procession from entering North Street. The petitioner alleges that this restriction is based solely on caste grounds. The private respondents allege that the deity’s procession through North Road will be defiled and polluted. Furthermore, members of the Devendra Kula Vellalar community are not included in the temple administration, are prevented from offering offerings, and are excluded from making decisions related to the festival.
The petitioner sought directions to officials, including the District Collector, Superintendent of Police, Revenue Divisional Officer, Tehsildar, and Police Inspector, to ensure the procession enters North Road and ensure a peaceful celebration by including some members of the Devendra Kula Vellalar community in the festival committee.
Respondents stated that there is no discrimination based on caste in the village. Each community has its own temple and its own customs. The procession route has remained the same for centuries and has never been diverted through the petitioner’s community’s road. People from all communities can enter and worship at the temple, and there are no caste-based restrictions. Citing an earlier order, they argued that this petition attempts to reopen the same issue.
The government stated that maintaining law and order was its priority and that all devotees, regardless of caste, would be allowed to worship and participate in religious activities at the temple.
The court did not consider this matter merely a dispute over the route of a village procession. Rather, it was an issue of constitutional morality and social democracy. In its order, the court clearly stated:
“The Constitution of India does not merely establish political democracy. It envisions a social democracy based on liberty, equality, and fraternity. The framers of the Constitution consciously recognized that caste discrimination had deprived a large section of Indian society of dignity and equal status for centuries. Therefore, the Constitution guaranteed equality before the law under Article 14, prohibited discrimination under Article 15, and abolished untouchability in all its forms under Article 17.”
The court further stated that when members of a Scheduled Caste community are prevented from participating in a public religious festival or having equal access to a public temple, it is not merely a private dispute.
“Such allegations strike at the very core of constitutional morality.”
Interpreting Article 17, the Court wrote –
“Article 17 abolishes untouchability and forbids its practice in any form. This constitutional prohibition is absolute. It is not subject to custom, usage, local tradition, or social acceptance. The Constitution does not merely prohibit physical segregation. Any disability imposed on a citizen on account of caste identity falls within the broad constitutional scope of Article 17, which it seeks to eradicate.”
Regarding Article 25, the Court stated that religious freedom is subject to public order, morality, health, and other provisions of Part III.
“No religious practice or customary usage can withstand constitutional scrutiny if it violates equality, dignity, or fraternity. Constitutional morality must always take precedence over social morality when the two conflict.”
The Constitution does not recognize hierarchical participation in public religious life based on caste hierarchy. Faith cannot be divided street by street along caste lines.
– Justice L. Victoria Gauri
‘Temple festivals are not just religious events, they are also social institutions’
Citing Article 51A(e), the court stated that temple festivals are not merely religious events.
“It is also a social institution meant to unite people. If a festival becomes a means of exclusion, the very purpose of community worship is defeated.”
The court, noting the petitioner’s allegations and the respondents’ denials, stated that disputed questions concerning historical routes, practices, and festival administration cannot be decided solely on the basis of affidavits in a writ petition. However, it also clarified:
“When allegations of caste-based exclusion from a public religious festival are made, constitutional courts cannot simply relegate the petitioner to a civil forum. Constitutional courts cannot remain silent spectators to issues of equality, dignity, and fraternity.”
These instructions were given to the District Collector
The court assigned primary responsibility to the District Collector, stating:
“The District Collector must remember that the issue is not merely about route management. It is linked to the constitutional promise of equal citizenship. The Constitution does not recognize hierarchical participation in public religious life based on caste hierarchy. Faith cannot be divided street by street along caste lines. Deities worshipped by the entire village belong to the entire village. Public religious institutions cannot become instruments for perpetuating social exclusion.”
The court ordered a detailed investigation within 12 weeks, directing the Collector to convene a meeting of all stakeholders (petitioner community, private respondent, village elders, revenue, police, and, if necessary, the HRCE department). Inspect the village and the existing procession route, either personally or through the Revenue Divisional Officer. Determine the historical route, whether the petitioner community has been excluded from the festivities or administration, whether there is any caste discrimination or untouchability, whether it is possible to include North Street in the procession, and what steps need to be taken to ensure inclusive participation of all sections.
If the Collector finds that including North Street is feasible and will promote the constitutional values of equality, fraternity, and social inclusion, appropriate arrangements should be made. No devotee should be denied entry to the temple, worship, prayer, or legitimate religious activities on the basis of caste. Strict legal action should be taken against any act of untouchability or caste discrimination. The Superintendent of Police should provide adequate security.
Summary
The court concluded its order with a profound observation: The true strength of a democratic society lies not in preserving exclusionary traditions, but in reforming them in the light of constitutional morality. Customs can be respected, discrimination never.”
Geetha Sunil Pillai
Courtesy: Hindi News