The Madras High Court recently observed that every stone placed on public roads and draped in clothes can’t be considered a religious idol. The Court also directed district authorities to remove what it called a ‘stone’ which the locals had started worshipping as a Murti.
Notably, Justice Anand Venkatesh was hearing a writ petition filed by one E.Shakthi Murugan. The petitioner had sought relief and police protection to remove what he branded as a “stone” that was “projected as an idol” at the entrance of his private property. While granting relief to the petitioner, the Court remarked that “superstitions still prevail in society and people have not evolved over time”.
Justice Venkatesh said, “It is quite unfortunate that such superstitious beliefs continue to prevail in the society and people do not seem to evolve with the passage of time.”
The petitioner submitted before the court that a stone covered with a green cloth was planted right in front of his property. Additionally, there were claims that it was an idol which didn’t allow him to enjoy his property. He also submitted photographs of what he called a ‘stone’. The petitioner added that he had sought Police protection from the Assistant Commissioner of Police to remove what the locals had started worshipping, however, he didn’t get a response. This forced him to move the court.
On its part, the State argued that the complaint was closed as the issue was civil.
However, the court noted that the petitioner could not approach the civil court as it would be a “very funny situation”. The court observed that, in that case, one person would claim that the stone should be treated as an idol while another would deny it.
Justice Venkatesh asserted that it would be impossible for a court to decide whether the stone had been uplifted to the status of an idol.
The court observed, “A very funny situation will arise before the Civil Court wherein the seventh respondent will claim that the stone must be treated as an idol and the petitioner will state that it is merely a stone and not an idol. It will become impossible for the Court to decide whether it is a stone or it has uplifted itself into the status of an idol. Fortunately in our country, no court exercises ecclesiastical jurisdiction.”
The court stated that pondering over such a frivolous issue would be a waste of judicial time. Consequently, the court directed the Assistant Commissioner to give necessary police protection to the petitioner and allowed him to remove the so-called stone.
