E-Paper
Thiruparankundram hill: Madras HC delivers split verdict on animal sacrifice
The bench agreed that the hill cannot be renamed and a clutch of other issues but they differed on animal sacrifice.
The Madurai bench of the Madras high court delivered a split verdict on a batch of pleas filed involving the Thiruparankundram Hill which was in the spotlight during the Murugan conference after right wing groups took offence to meat eating on the hilltop which has both a Murugan temple and a dargah.
The different pleas sought renaming the Thiruparankundram hill as Sikander hill, renaming the Samanar (Jain) hill, permitting animal sacrifice, and construction work.
The bench comprising justices J Nisha Banu and S Srimathy were in agreement that the hill cannot be renamed and a clutch of other issues but they differed on animal sacrifice.
Justice Banu permitted animal sacrifices saying it is a religious practice of both Hindu and Muslim communities while justice Srimathy banned it saying that there is no proof of this being an ancient religious practice.
“Article 25 of the Constitution of India confers the right to freedom of religion which includes “practice”… in the absence of any law prohibiting animal sacrifice, which is a part of religious practice, there cannot be any order by this court restraining such activity,” justice Banu said in the verdict delivered on June 24.
“Moreover, the Dargah is located on the southern side peak of the Thirupparankundram Hill, while the Subramaniya Swamy Temple and Kasi Viswanathar Temple are situated at different locations. Thus, no religious practices of one community impinge upon the sacred spaces of another,” justice Banu said.
“Given that ritual animal sacrifices are traditionally performed in multiple Hindu temples across the Madurai region, a blanket prohibition would amount to discriminatory enforcement. Animal Sacrifice, being an established religious practice, is observed not only in the Dargah but also in several hindu Temples across the country, and therefore the same cannot be selectively banned,” she said.
However, justice Srimathy said that there was no evidence to prove that the practice of animal sacrifice was established for a long time.
“Interestingly it is seen that there is no meat stall in Sannadhi Street, around 300 meters from the temple there is no meat stall, there is no broiler chicken stall for more than 300 meters,” justice Srimathy said. “In fact most of the marriage halls in Tiruparankundram do not allow non vegetarian cooking at all. All these facts state how the devotees protect the holiness of the Tiruparankundram Hill and the Subramaniya Swamy Temple,” she said.
“The Tirupanrankundram Hill shall not be called either as Sikkandar Malai or as Samanar Kundru,” the bench of the two justices said in the order.
“The Dargah is directed to approach the Civil Court to establish their practice of animal sacrifice as well as prayer during Ramzan, Bakr-eid and other Muslim festivals prevailing prior to the order in 1920,” the verdict said.
The bench directed the state to permit the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to survey the hill and demarcate the protected monuments, dargah and the temple and submit a report to the court within a year.
The 107-page verdict was reserved on April 30 and delivered on June 24 and the matter has been referred to the chief justice of the Madras HC for a tie breaker verdict.
