Tamil Nadu: Madras HC stated, “Right to privacy encompasses spiritual orientation alongside sexual & gender orientation

In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court has affirmed that the right to privacy, encompassing sexual and gender orientation, also extends to an individual’s spiritual orientation. This decision was made by Justice G.R. Swaminathan of the Madurai Bench while allowing a writ petition filed by P Naveen Kumar, a resident of Karur district and a devotee of the revered Tamil Nadu saint, Sri Sadasiva Brahmendral.

Naveen Kumar had sought permission to conduct “Annadhanam” (community feast) and “Angapradakshinam” (a ritual involving rolling over plantain leaves left behind by devotees who partake in the feast) on May 18, 2024, the Samadhi day of Sri Sadasiva Brahmendral. The petitioner argued that this ritual, practiced for over 120 years, was halted in 2015 following a court order by the Tamil Nadu government.

In his petition, Kumar highlighted that the prohibition of the ritual violated fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 25(1) of the Constitution of India, which ensures the freedom to profess, practice, and propagate religion. He contended that the 2015 court order, which deemed the practice discriminatory and a violation of the right to a dignified life under Article 21, was issued without hearing the devotees or the temple trustees, thereby breaching principles of natural justice.

Organiser E-Exit poll Lok Sabha Elections 2024

Justice Swaminathan, in his ruling, emphasized the inclusive nature of the right to privacy, stating, “If the right to privacy includes sexual and gender orientation, it certainly includes one’s spiritual orientation also.” He acknowledged the petitioner’s argument that the ritual of rolling over banana leaves left by devotees is a deeply held spiritual belief and right.

The court directed the Karur district administration to consider Kumar’s representation for permission to perform “Annadhanam” and “Angapradakshinam,” underscoring the need to respect and uphold spiritual practices that do not harm public order or morality.

The petitioner explained that Sri Sadasiva Brahmendral, who attained Jeeva Samadhi at Nerur village in Karur district, has been venerated for decades. On his Samadhi day, followers have traditionally performed the roll-over ritual on plantain leaves, a practice integral to their spiritual observance.

The 2015 ban had directed authorities to prevent anyone from performing Angapradakshinam on leftover leaves or after food consumption by devotees. This ruling now allows the revival of the practice, provided it adheres to legal and ethical standards.

ustice G.R. Swaminathan of the Madurai Bench delivered the judgment while allowing a writ petition filed by P. Naveen Kumar, a resident of Karur district and a devotee of Sri Sadasiva Brahmendral.

The petitioner sought permission to conduct “Annadhanam” (community feast) and “Angapradakshinam” (a ritual involving rolling over plantain leaves left by devotees after meals) on May 18, 2024, the Samadhi day of Sri Sadasiva Brahmendral. This ritual, observed for over 120 years, was halted in 2015 following a court order that deemed it discriminatory and violative of the right to a dignified life under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Justice Swaminathan emphasized the inclusive nature of the right to privacy, stating, “If the right to privacy includes sexual and gender orientation, it certainly includes one’s spiritual orientation also.” He underscored that this right should not impinge on the rights and freedoms of others, but within those bounds, individuals are free to express their spiritual orientation.

Referring to Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to move freely throughout India, Justice Swaminathan noted that this right extends beyond mere walking or vehicular transportation to include practices such as Angapradakshinam. “I take judicial notice of the fact that Angapradakshinam (rolling on the ground) is an established religious practice resorted to by devotees,” he stated.

Justice Swaminathan highlighted the practice among Ayyappa devotees at the Pamba river in Kerala, known as Pamba Sadhi, and argued that preventing Brahmendral devotees from engaging in similar acts of devotion would violate the right to equality under Article 14 of the Constitution.

The court also declared the 2015 order banning the ritual as “null and void” since it was passed without hearing the necessary parties. “The question of the authorities granting permission does not arise at all,” Justice Swaminathan asserted. He ruled that organizers are at liberty to hold the events as traditionally done, and no authority or private individual can prevent devotees from performing Angapradakshinam on the banana leaves after meals.

The Madras High Court has delivered a significant ruling, declaring a 2015 order prohibiting a religious ritual as null and void due to a violation of principles of natural justice. Justice G.R. Swaminathan made this declaration while linking the right to perform religious rituals to the broader right to privacy, as recognized in the landmark judgment of Justice KS Puttaswamy (retd) vs Union of India.

The court emphasized that if sexual orientation is considered a private matter, so is one’s spiritual orientation. Justice Swaminathan highlighted that various religious practices, such as piercing small hooks as vows to Lord Muruga or undertaking fire-walks in devotion to Amman, are integral features of Tamil religious culture and are protected under the Constitution.

“The organsiers (R4) are at liberty to organize the events as traditionally done. In my considered view, such a right is traceable not only to Article 25(1) but also to the other fundamental rights cataloged in Part III,” stated Justice Swaminathan, citing Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 19(1)(d), 21, and Article 25(1) of the Constitution.

The court underscored that any assertion that a religious practice violates constitutional morality must meet rigorous standards, and the burden of proof lies with the individual making the assertion. Justice Swaminathan emphasized that administrative or quasi-judicial orders, like judicial orders, can be deemed nullities if they violate principles of natural justice.

The petitioner’s stance was supported by the counsel for the President of the Nerur Sathguru Sathasiva Brammediral Sabha, further endorsing the petitioner’s guaranteed fundamental right under Article 25(1) of the Constitution to carry out religious vows.

“The writ petition suffered the fatal vice of non-joinder of necessary parties. Direction to the authorities not to allow anyone to roll over on the banana leaves left after the partaking of the meals was issued behind the back of the devotees and the trustees,” stated Justice Swaminathan, highlighting the lack of consultation with affected parties in the 2015 order.