Delay in Test Identification & Absence of Motive Fatal to Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man for Murder Tokre Koli or Dhor Koli – Both Stand on Same Legal Footing: Bombay High Court Slams Scrutiny Committee for Disregarding Pre-Constitutional Records Consent Is No Defence When Victim Is Under 16: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Granting Pre-Arrest Bail in Minor Rape Cases Would Send a Harmful Societal Signal: Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail to Accused Citing POCSO’s Rigorous Standards Void Marriage No Shield Against Cruelty Charges: Karnataka High Court Affirms Section 498A Applies Even In Deceptive and Void Marital Relationships Consolidation Authorities Cannot Confer Ownership Or Alter Scheme Post Confirmation Without Due Process: Punjab & Haryana High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Jurisdiction Over Void Post-Scheme Orders Litigation Policy is Not Law, Can’t Enforce Guidelines Through Courts: Rajasthan High Court Refuses to Entertain Quo Warranto Against Additional Advocate General’s Appointment Police and Lawyers Are Two Limbs of Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance in Police Misconduct Incident Sole Testimony, Forensic Gaps, and Withheld Witness: No Conviction Possible: Delhi High Court Affirms Acquittal in Murder Trial Remand Keeps the Dispute Alive – Not Arrears: Bombay High Court Holds SVLDRS Relief Must Be Computed Under Litigation Category Daughter’s Right Extinguished When Partition Effected Prior to 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Trial Courts Cannot Direct Filing of Challan After Conviction — Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Directions Against DSP Veer Singh Rule 4 Creates Parity, Not a Parallel Pension Pipeline: Rajasthan High Court Denies Dual Pension to Ex-Chief Justice Serving as SHRC Chairperson Right to Be Heard Must Be Preserved Where Claim Has a Legal Basis: Orissa High Court Upholds Impleadment of Will Beneficiary in Partition Suit Long-Term Ad Hocism Is Exploitation, Not Employment: Orissa High Court Orders Regularization Of Junior Typist After 25 Years Of Service PIL Cannot Be a Tool for Personal Grievances: Supreme Court Upholds Municipal Body’s Power to Revise Property Tax After 16 Years Omission of Accused’s Name by Eyewitness in FIR is a Fatal Lacuna: Supreme Court Acquits Man Convicted of Murder Correction In Revenue Map Under Section 30 Isn’t A Tool To Shift Plot Location After 17 Years: Supreme Court Quashes High Court’s Remand Casteist Abuses Must Be In Public View: Supreme Court Quashes SC/ST Act Proceedings Where Alleged Insults Occurred Inside Complainant’s House Resignation Bars Pension, But Not Gratuity: Supreme Court Draws Sharp Line Between Voluntary Retirement and Resignation in DTC Employee Case

Landmark Judgment Upholds Religious Freedom: Court Allows Rathyatra Procession with Chariot

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


[City], [Date] – In a significant ruling, the [Court Name] delivered a landmark judgment today, affirming the right to religious freedom and allowing the revered Rathyatra procession to proceed with a chariot. The court emphasized the historical significance and purpose of the procession, rejecting any interference by the authorities.

The judgment, rendered in the case of WPA 14269 of 2023, titled Manoj Mishra v. State of West Bengal & Ors., came after the petitioner, Mr. Manoj Mishra, sought permission to carry the deity from a temple near the Delta Jute Mill gate to Beltala More using a chariot.

The court, presided over by Justice Rajasekhar Mantha, observed, “To require the petitioner to physically carry the deity without a chariot would negate, defeat, and compromise the object and purpose of the Rathyatra.” The court further noted that Rathyatra had been a cherished tradition for thousands of years, where Lord Jagannath and Balabhadra traveled on a chariot to visit an unwell aunt.

Highlighting the religious significance of the procession, Justice Mantha stated, “People of all religious denominations have participated with joy and actively supported Rathyatra in this State. To restrict a Rathyatra and impose conditions would amount to interference with a religious practice which has not happened in this State or any other part of the country till date.”

Addressing concerns raised by the police about potential disruptions, the court emphasized that appropriate measures should be taken to ensure the peaceful conduct of the procession. “If there is any anticipation of vested interest or elements to disrupt the religious function, stern procedural measures shall be taken by the police,” the court asserted.

The judgment reaffirmed the order passed on June 16, 2023, and disposed of the case, CAN 1 of 2023. The court ordered all parties to act on the server copy of the order downloaded from the official website.

This ruling serves as a significant milestone in upholding religious freedom, recognizing the cultural and religious heritage associated with the Rathyatra procession. It affirms the right of individuals to practice their faith without unnecessary interference, safeguarding the diversity and inclusivity of religious traditions in the State.

Date of Judgment: June 19, 2023

Manoj Mishra VS State of West Bengal & Ors.

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Manoj-vs-State-19-june-23-Cal.-HC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News