SC Allows Jain Temples to Open for Worshippers during Paryushan Festival

Must Read

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration,...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be...

Follow us

A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court on the 21st August decided to allow entry into Jain Temples during the Paryushan festival. It was subject to the Standard Operating Procedure rules in light of COVID-19.

Brief facts of the case

The petition arose from an appeal against a Bombay High Court order. The appeal was filed by a trust named the Shri Parshwatilak Shwetambar Murtipujak Jain Trust.

The plea asserted how this festival is essential to the Jain community asking the followers to abstain from taking part in it is “arbitrary unreasonable and without basis.”

They had moved to the Apex Court after the Bombay HC refused to permit the Jain community from gathering in temples during their Paryushan festival to offer prayers. This was done keeping in mind the importance of social distancing during the pandemic. The HC had opined that it is the “duty of every right-thinking person” to balance their religious belief and their responsibility towards the public at large. They asked the people to give public health paramount importance while agreeing with the public health officials.

Arguments

Sr. Adv. Dushyant Dave represented the Trust. He argued that they are seeking permission for a congregation of only 250 people per day. He added that the State is not interfering with malls, saloons, liquor shops. Hence it is unreasonable to impose such restrictions on the places of worship and not permit the congregation from gathering.

Sr. Adv. Manu Singhvi represented the State. He mentioned how there had been an exponential increase in the number of coronavirus cases, and it would not be prudent to allow such a gathering. He argued how permitting the Trust would lead to opening a floodgate. To support this, he mentioned that Ganesh Chaturthi is around the corner and it is the biggest festival in Maharashtra. He contended that if Jains are allowed, there would be other communities using this instance and asking for the same.

Court’s Observation

The three-judge bench headed by CJI SA Bobde observed that such a blanket ban on the religious congregation is not possible. They have allowed before the conduction of Jagannath Rath Yatra in the State of Odisha. But, it was still subject to strict guidelines issued and rules made by the State Government in light of the pandemic.

In response to Sr. Adv. Singhvi’s contention about opening floodgate the CJI stated that if only 5 people are gathering at a time, it doesn’t mind going beyond the community.

The Court clarified that this present order doesn’t set a precedent, referring to the upcoming Ganesh Chaturthi. They stated that this Order is only meant from the present appellant Trust and does not extend to any such Trust or temple or congregation. He added that the others would be subject to the State Government.

Court’s Order

The Bench comprised of the CJI, Justice Bopanna, and Justice Ramasubramaniun. They allowed the congregation of devotees. But, it would be subject to Standard Operating Procedure. They also added that this order is limited to this prayer and does not extend to other such congregations.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as he was aggrieved by the...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence in diagnosing the septicemia and...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration, possession and a permanent prohibitory...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In Defence of Environment and Animals...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of the Central Government. Any reasonable...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be interpreted to also apply to...

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Challenging Allahabad High Court Order Granting Interim Bail on Medical Grounds

An appeal was filed before the Supreme Court, challenging the Judgment & Order of the Allahabad High Court in the matter of State of U.P...

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High Court to permit the members...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on basis of re-employment till the...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract. It reiterated that mere delay...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -