{"id":2911,"date":"2025-03-25T13:26:59","date_gmt":"2025-03-25T07:56:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/?p=2911"},"modified":"2025-03-25T13:29:32","modified_gmt":"2025-03-25T07:59:32","slug":"madras-hc-upholds-judicial-discipline-temporarily-halts-angapradakshinam-practice-pending-supreme-court-verdict","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/madras-hc-upholds-judicial-discipline-temporarily-halts-angapradakshinam-practice-pending-supreme-court-verdict\/","title":{"rendered":"Madras HC Upholds Judicial Discipline: Temporarily Halts \u2018Angapradakshinam\u2019 Practice Pending Supreme Court Verdict"},"content":{"rendered":"

The District Collector\u00a0 [<\/strong>Appellants]\u00a0 Vs.\u00a0 <\/strong>P.Naveen Kumar\u00a0 \u00a0[<\/strong>Respondents]<\/h1>\n

W.P.(MD).No.1261 of 2024<\/p>\n

(CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR AND MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN)<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The Madras High Court\u2019s Madurai Bench has temporarily prohibited the practice of \u2018Angapradakshinam\u2019 at Nerur in Karur District, where devotees traditionally roll over used plantain leaves after partaking meals as part of a religious ritual. This interim order was passed while deciding writ appeals against a Single Bench\u2019s judgment, which had earlier allowed the continuation of this practice along with \u2018Annadhanam\u2019 (offering of food). The Division Bench, comprising Justice R. Suresh Kumar and Justice G. Arul Murugan, held that a Single Bench does not possess the jurisdiction to nullify a prior Division Bench judgment, emphasizing the importance of judicial discipline and hierarchy.<\/p>\n

The appeals were filed after the Single Bench had overturned a previous Division Bench ruling that sought to end the \u2018Angapradakshinam\u2019 practice on grounds of dignity and health hazards. The Division Bench highlighted that the Single Bench had erred by assuming jurisdiction to declare the earlier ruling as a nullity, stating that such a move defied the principle of judicial discipline. Instead, if doubts arose, the Single Bench should have referred the matter to a larger bench.<\/p>\n

The court underscored that the finality of Division Bench decisions must be respected to maintain the consistency and credibility of the judiciary. The judges noted that disregarding this discipline could undermine public confidence in the judicial process.<\/p>\n

Additionally, the Division Bench refrained from giving a final verdict on whether \u2018Angapradakshinam\u2019 violates public or constitutional morality. The Bench observed that while such practices may not directly harm public order or health under Article 25 of the Constitution, their compliance with constitutional morality requires deeper scrutiny. However, since a similar matter regarding the same practice at Karnataka\u2019s Kukke Subramanya Temple is already pending before the Supreme Court with an interim stay, the Madras High Court deferred further ruling on this aspect.<\/p>\n

The Bench also pointed out that \u2018Angapradakshinam\u2019 is a long-standing religious practice in Hinduism, observed in several temples. While acknowledging the significance of religious customs, the court emphasized that decisions on restricting such practices based on morality or public health should be left to the State, subject to judicial oversight where necessary.<\/p>\n

Given the absence of concrete evidence proving that \u2018Angapradakshinam\u2019 causes severe health hazards, the court declined to make such a finding. Nonetheless, it left open the larger question of whether this practice could result in discrimination or exclusion, contrary to constitutional values.<\/p>\n

Ultimately, the High Court allowed the writ appeals to the extent of restoring the primacy of the earlier Division Bench judgment and directed the State and District Administration to ensure that the practice remains suspended until the Supreme Court delivers its verdict on the pending matter.<\/p>\n

In summary, the ruling upholds judicial hierarchy, temporarily bans the religious practice in question, and defers the final decision to the Apex Court\u2019s judgment on the broader issue of public and constitutional morality regarding such customs.<\/p>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The District Collector\u00a0 [Appellants]\u00a0 Vs.\u00a0 P.Naveen Kumar\u00a0 \u00a0[Respondents] W.P.(MD).No.1261 of 2024 (CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR AND MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN)   The Madras High Court\u2019s Madurai Bench has temporarily prohibited the practice of \u2018Angapradakshinam\u2019 at Nerur in Karur District, where devotees traditionally roll over used plantain leaves after partaking meals as part of a religious […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":2912,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[12],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2911","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-judgement"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2911","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2911"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2911\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2915,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2911\/revisions\/2915"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2912"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2911"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2911"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xpertslegal.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2911"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}