The Madras High Court has issued an interim order restraining the construction of a church near a century-old Mariyamman temple in Coimbatore, citing potential mala fide intentions. This decision came in response to a writ petition filed by Balasubramaniyam N, a resident of Kalapatti in Coimbatore, and was delivered by a Bench comprising Justices GR Swaminathan and V Lakshminarayanan on May 29. [Balasubramaniyam Vs Collector]
Communal Sensitivity and Local Opposition
The court highlighted the communal sensitivity of Coimbatore, a city that has previously experienced religious tensions and violence. The proposed church is planned to be erected in close proximity to the existing Mariyamman Temple, a fact that raised concerns among the predominantly Hindu community in the area. The Bench noted that the construction of such a large church near the temple, where only a few Christian families reside, could be perceived as an act with ulterior motives.
Legal Considerations and Public Sentiment
Justices Swaminathan and Lakshminarayanan emphasized that when a substantial Hindu majority strongly opposes the church’s construction near the temple, authorities must not dismiss these objections lightly. The petitioner’s counsel pointed to recent political changes in the state, particularly the appointment of C Joseph Vijay as Chief Minister, arguing that these changes have emboldened certain fundamentalist groups.
The counsel also referenced controversial statements and actions by political figures, such as Speaker JCD Prabhakar quoting biblical verses, and Udhayanidhi Stalin’s remarks on Sanatana dharma, to illustrate the heightened sensitivity of the issue.
Legal and Property Disputes
The court acknowledged that the land proposed for the church construction, identified as Survey No.155/2, was recorded as a tar road in revenue records, indicating it is public property. This supports the petitioner’s claim that the construction was intended on government poramboke land and a public road.
More Read
A civil suit challenging the earlier 2010 permission for the church’s construction is still pending in the District Munsif Court, Coimbatore. The High Court had previously allowed the Church of South India to reapply for construction only after the civil suit’s resolution. The Bench reiterated that, according to Article 25 of the Constitution, the right to practice religion is subject to public order, and that the State need not automatically concede to majority opposition unless the opposition is proven unreasonable.
Conclusion and Legal Implications
Concluding that a prima facie case exists to restrain the church’s construction, the court underscored the potential harm to social harmony if interim relief was not granted. The Bench assured that changes in the political landscape would not influence the legal stance on this matter, as long as the law remains unchanged.
Representing the petitioner were Advocates D Baskar, E Ashok Kumar, KB Rohitih, Pooja J, and B Sankara Narayanan. Additional Government Pleader LSM Hasan Fizal, along with Additional Public Prosecutor R Muniyapparaj, represented the government and police respondents, respectively.
