Justice N. Anand Venkatesh, Madras High Court
What Is Divine To One Should Not Be Nuisance To Others, 'Nama Sankeerthanam' Needs Collector’s Nod: Madras High Court
|A petition was filed seeking action against the Global Organisation for Divinity for allegedly operating a prayer hall in a residential area without prior approval.
The Madras High Court held that devotional gatherings involving 'Nama Sankeerthanam' the chanting of divine names cannot be conducted in a residential property without prior permission from the District Collector.
A petition was filed seeking directions from the District Collector, the local police authorities, and the Commissioner to take appropriate legal action against the Global Organisation for Divinity, which he claimed was operating a prayer hall within a residential area without obtaining prior permission.
A Bench of Justice N. Anand Venkatesh held, “In the considered view of this Court, whenever a residential premises is attempted to be converted as a prayer hall, it requires the permission of the District Collector. This position of law has been reiterated in various orders passed by this Court.”
The Court added, “The fifth respondent has flatly given his opinion about the Nama Sankeerthanam that is done in the subject premises. What sounds to the fifth respondent as divine, is causing nuisance to the petitioner.”
Advocate S.Shivram appeared for the petitioner and Additional Government Pleader P. Ganesan appeared for the respondents.
In their defense, the respondents contended that the prayers were being conducted for personal spiritual fulfilment and invoked their constitutional rights under Articles 25 and 26, which protect religious freedoms. They also stated that an application for permission had already been submitted to the District Collector and was pending consideration.
However, the Court rejected the argument that constitutional rights permit unregulated religious assemblies in residential areas.
The Court noted, “It is quite evident from the above submission that till date, no permission has been given by the District Collector. Therefore, till such a permission is obtained, the fifth respondent cannot convert the residential premises into a prayer hall. If at all any prayers are conducted, the same should confine inside the house without causing nuisance to anyone.”
The Court emphasized that unregulated religious gatherings in residential neighborhoods, especially when they draw large crowds, lead to congestion, obstruct traffic, and cause general inconvenience to other residents and road users. He cautioned that such activities, if left unchecked, can disturb the public order and harmony of the area.
Accordingly, the Court directed the local police, specifically the Inspector of Police, to ensure that no public nuisance is caused by the respondents, It held, “The second respondent shall ensure that no nuisance is caused by the fourth and fifth respondents and they do not convert the residential premises into a prayer hall. Till the permission is given by the District Collector, the fourth and fifth respondents shall not use the residential premises as a prayer hall. This shall be ensured by the second respondent.”
Cause Title: Prakash Ramachandran v. The District Collector & Ors.
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocate S.Shivram
Respondents: Advocates P.Ganesan, R.Venkatesh Perumal, T.Seenivasan, Saughanthika A.S, Harshini for K.Gowtham Kumar