Rajasthan High Court canceled the case of forced entry of temple against Dalit woman, said- it may be a case of caste discrimination

The High Court, referring to the petitioner being a Scheduled Caste (SC), said that Dalits and backward castes have historically been denied access to religious institutions. The case is related to the Mahakaleshwar Mahadev temple in Udaipur.

Published on: 15 Oct 2024, 5:14 pm

Jodhpur/Udaipur – The Rajasthan High Court, while quashing an FIR lodged against a Dalit woman, made an important observation that the case may be one of caste discrimination. The court said that the SC/ST background of the petitioner cannot be ignored, especially considering the fact that historically marginalised communities have been barred from entering religious places.

The court said that denying entry to the petitioner into the temple and subsequently filing a criminal complaint may possibly amount to caste discrimination, which violates the principles of equality and promotes social exclusion.

The Rajasthan High Court made this remark while hearing the case of an FIR lodged against a woman named Sapna Nimaavat for allegedly forcibly entering the Mahakaleshwar Mahadev temple in Udaipur. The petition to quash the FIR was filed by Sapna Nimaavat, the FIR was registered on May 14, 2024 at Ambamata Police Station, Udaipur under sections 448 (illegal entry), 427 (causing harm), and 143 (unlawful assembly). The court, after hearing both the parties and looking at the evidence, ruled in favor of the petitioner woman.

The High Court made important observations regarding caste discrimination in its judgment, stating, “The SC/ST background of the petitioner cannot be ignored, especially in view of the fact that access to religious institutions has been restricted for historically marginalized communities. Denying entry to the petitioner into the temple and the subsequent filing of a criminal complaint may be an example of caste discrimination. This discriminatory conduct by the trustee not only violates the principles of equality but also promotes social exclusion, which is against the constitutional obligation to ensure the dignity of all citizens, especially those who come from oppressed communities.”

The case was heard by Judge Arun Monga. The FIR alleged that the accused Sapna Nimaavat and others were trying to create chaos in the temple. The complaint was received by the Superintendent of Police, Udaipur, after which the FIR was registered. The FIR said that an attempt was made to enter the temple by breaking the lock of the door.

However, the counsel for the petitioner argued that the FIR was an abuse of the legal process and was filed with malafide intention. The court also found that the video evidence did not prove forcible entry or damage to property.

Key observations of the Court

• No criminal intent: Justice Monga said that mens rea is required to apply sections 448, 427, and 143 of the Indian Penal Code. The court found that the petitioner did not intend to harm anyone but only wanted to enter the temple, which was legally correct.
• Public access to temples: The court also clarified that a temple is a public place and all citizens have the right to worship there, regardless of their caste or social status. The temple trustees were restricting public access to the temple by erecting barriers, which violates the religious freedom guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution.
• Caste discrimination: The High Court referred to the petitioner being a Scheduled Caste (SC) and said that Dalits and backward castes have historically been denied access to religious institutions. In this case, the denial of entry into the temple and then filing a criminal complaint can be considered an example of caste discrimination.
• Veracity of FIR questioned: The court also questioned the fact that the FIR was not lodged by the temple trustee but by a police sub-inspector who claimed to be an eyewitness to the incident. This raises questions about the credibility of the FIR.
• No evidence: Judge Monga also found that the photographs and video evidence presented did not show any evidence of forced entry or damage to property.

The High Court, after examining all the evidence, ruled in favour of the petitioner Sapna Nimaavat and quashed the FIR. Justice Monga categorically stated that the trustees of the temple cannot obstruct the worship of the public and everyone should get equal rights. The court also said that such discrimination, especially with people from the Dalit community, is unacceptable.