Bombay High Court Dismisses PIL To Restrain State Functionaries From Attending Religious Rituals & Performing Bhoomi Puja

Read Time: 04 minutes

Synopsis

While relying on newspaper reports, Bhagwanji Rayani submitted that ministers and individuals with ministerial status should be stopped from leaving their offices during working hours for temple visits and religious rites, visiting voters' constituencies, and addressing election rallies during electioneering, as they are paid public servants

The Bombay High Court recently dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking to restrain state functionaries from attending religious rituals and performing bhoomi pooja.

A division bench of the high court, comprising Chief Justice Devendra Upadhyaya and Justice Amit Borkar, was hearing a PIL filed by the public trust Forum for Fast Justice.

Bhagwanji Rayani, a senior citizen, appeared in person and requested the court to issue directions to stop the use of public premises for installing any idol or picture of any deity, except those of the Father of the Nation, the President, or the Prime Minister, and to prohibit the performance of any pujas or similar rites.

Additionally, he sought a ban on ritualistic pujas, idol immersion, and the disposal of dead bodies in natural water bodies to prevent environmental hazards.

While relying on newspaper reports, Bhagwanji Rayani submitted that ministers and individuals with ministerial status should be stopped from leaving their offices during working hours for temple visits and religious rites, visiting voters' constituencies, and addressing election rallies during electioneering, as they are paid public servants.

However, the high court, in its order, noted that the petitioner did not make out any legal ground for relief except for making general assertions, leading to the dismissal of the PIL.

“On query made by the Court repeatedly as to how and on what ground the prayers made in the PIL petition which, as observed above are omnibus in nature, can be granted, petitioner No.2 kept reading the averments made in the writ petition and has also submitted a written submission. The PIL petition, in our opinion, does not make out any legal ground except for making general assertions and seeking a prayer that Court may advice the State to amend the Representation of People Act, 1951,” the order reads.

Case title: Forum for Fast Justice vs UOI & Ors