No god or religion will support an illegal religious structure on a footpath, right to religion cannot be invoked: Karnataka HC

The Karnataka High Court recently observed that the fundamental right to religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of India cannot be invoked to protect a temple which is illegally built on a footpath..In its order passed on July 14, the Court further opined that the right to construct an unauthorized temple (or any other religious structure) cannot be said to be part of any religion or religious practice protected under Article 25..A Division Bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice M Nagaprasanna held,."The fundamental right under Article 25 of the Constitution of India does not extend to offering worship or prayers at each and every place. Surely, the fundamental right under Article 25 of the Constitution of India cannot be invoked for protecting an illegal structure of a temple which is on a footpath. The right to construct unauthorized temple and that also on a footpath cannot be said to be an essential part of any religion or religious practice which can be protected under Article 25 of the Constitution of India."Karnataka High Court.The Court made these pertinent observations while dealing with a writ petition highlighting the failure of Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to demolish an unauthorized temple built on a footpath. The Court said that BBMP had been postponing the action of demolition citing "one reason or the other". .Further, a Residents Welfare Association (RWA) had intervened in the writ petition seeking to protect the temple. It had argued that initially, the construction was not on a road or a footpath. However, as the road was widened, it may be on the footpath at present. .The Court came down heavily on the RWA, stating that it is the duty of the citizens is to see that no illegal structure, especially illegal religious structure, comes up in their locality..In this regard, the order reads, ."The duty of the citizens is to see that no illegal structure and especially, illegal religious structure comes up in their locality. But they want to protect a temple which has come up on a footpath. In fact, that was the precise observation made in paragraph 5 of the order dated 4th March 2020. If the intention of the applicants was really bona fide, long back, they could have applied for relocation of the temple from the footpath. But their intention appears to be to protect the illegality.".The Court further noted,."We do not think that any god or religion will support an illegal religious structure which is on a footpath. A religious structure cannot become an obstacle on a footpath which is meant for walking."Karnataka High Court.Under the circumstances, the Bench proceeded to impose costs of Rs 25,000 on the members of RWA, which is to be deposited in the Chief Minister's COVID-19 Relief Fund within six weeks..The Court refrained from passing any adverse order against BBMP for not going ahead with the demolition of the temple, taking into consideration the COVID-19 lockdown in the state. ."Considering the fact that the city is under lockdown, we are not passing any adverse order against BBMP as of today while we remind BBMP of its legal obligations.".The matter will be next heard on July 30..[Read order]