Law should unite, not create discord between religions: Kerala HC
The court noted that the object of the 1965 Act was to permit the entry of all sects and classes of Hindus into temples and to prevent discrimination among them.
The court noted that the object of the 1965 Act was to permit the entry of all sects and classes of Hindus into temples and to prevent discrimination among them.
The court noted that the object of the 1965 Act was to permit the entry of all sects and classes of Hindus into temples and to prevent discrimination among them.
The Kerala High Court has said that statutes, rules and regulations should not become instruments for creating discord or disharmony between religions, castes or communities, but must instead function as a unifying force.
The observation was made while dismissing a plea challenging the entry of two Christian priests into the Adoor Sree Parthasarathy Temple in Pathanamthitta district in 2023, alleging that it violated the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Act, 1965.
The court was considering a petition seeking a declaration that the entry of Dr Zacharias Mar Aprem and another Christian priest during a Sreekrishna Jayanthi function on September 7, 2023, was illegal. The priests had been invited to the temple as guests to attend the event.
The plea, filed by Sanil Narayanan Nampoothiri, also sought directions to the Travancore Devaswom Board (TDB) and the temple authorities to prevent the entry of non-Hindus into the shrine.
A bench of Justices Raja Vijayaraghavan V and K V Jayakumar referred to a Sanskrit verse from the Taittiriya Upanishad—'Matru Devo Bhava, Pitru Devo Bhava, Acharya Devo Bhava, Atithi Devo Bhava'—and noted that it signifies that the mother, father, teacher and guest are to be treated with reverence and respect.
The bench said that in the present case, the priests were permitted entry as guests by the tantri, which was fundamentally distinct from an entry claimed as a matter of right.
"Such a permissive and ceremonial entry cannot be construed as a violation of the provisions of the Act, the rules framed thereunder, or the established rites, usages and customs governing the temple," the court said.
The court noted that the object of the 1965 Act was to permit the entry of all sects and classes of Hindus into temples and to prevent discrimination among them. However, while framing the rules, Rule 3(a) introduced a prohibition on the entry of non-Hindus, even though the parent Act contained no such restriction.
"It is well settled that if there is any inconsistency between the parent Act and the Rules made thereunder, the former shall prevail," the bench said. Emphasising that the purpose of law is to secure social harmony, the court said statutory provisions and subordinate legislation must be interpreted in a manner that advances constitutional values and social cohesion.
"Statutes, rules and regulations ought not to become instruments for fomenting discord between different religions, castes or communities. On the contrary, the legal framework must foster mutual respect and coexistence," it said.
In view of the apparent inconsistency between the Act and Rule 3(a), the court said the government should examine whether the rule requires reconsideration, amendment or modification to bring it in line with legislative intent and constitutional principles.
"It is for the government to consider whether Rule 3(a) should be retained in its present form or suitably amended, after due consultation with the TDB, tantris, religious scholars and other relevant stakeholders," the bench said, while dismissing the plea.
(With PTI inputs)