Madhya Pradesh: Entry of people of a particular class banned in the temple, knocked the door of the court for permission… got this order
Only people of upper castes are allowed entry in a temple in Madhya Pradesh. People of SC-ST and OBC communities are prohibited from entering the temple in Gaurjhamar village. In such a situation, this matter has reached the MP High Court. A public interest litigation filed regarding caste discrimination in the temple was heard and resolved by the High Court Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Ket and Justice Vivek Jain Division Bench. The petition was filed by Uttam Singh Lodhi, a resident of Gaurjhamar village of Deori tehsil of Sagar district.
The petitioner alleged that only people from upper castes are being allowed entry in the Shri Dattatreya temple located in the village, while people from SC-ST and OBC categories are being prevented from entering the temple. The petitioner also alleged that the temple is occupied by land mafias, who are implementing this discriminatory policy. Uttam Singh Lodhi also claimed that the local administration has deployed police force there, which is hurting the religious sentiments of people from backward castes.
Controversy over caste discrimination in temples
During the hearing, the High Court found that earlier an order was given to maintain status quo in this case. In such a situation, while disposing of the petition, the court made it clear that if the status quo order is violated, the petitioner will have the freedom to file a contempt petition. Disputes have also come up earlier regarding caste discrimination in temples in rural areas of Madhya Pradesh. In this case, the petitioner had claimed that some influential people have taken over the temple and social harmony is being violated there. The matter is related to the violation of the right to equality (Article 14) and religious freedom (Article 25) provided in the Constitution.
There was no direct intervention on the petition
However, instead of directly intervening on this petition, the High Court decided to keep the status quo order already given in effect. In such a situation, now if the ban on the entry of people of any community in the temple continues, then the petitioner can file a contempt petition in the court. In this case, senior advocate Rameshwar Singh Thakur and advocate Vinayak Shah presented their arguments on behalf of the petitioner, while Additional Advocate General Harpreet Rooprah presented his arguments on behalf of the state government and senior advocate Kishore Srivastava presented his arguments on behalf of the private non-applicants.
It is clear from the court’s decision that the High Court has insisted on implementing the orders already passed instead of directly intervening. This case raises serious issues like caste discrimination and social equality in religious places, on which further legal battles may continue.
