Madras HC Declined Permission For Conducting Christian Prayers: Religious Rights Not Absolute

Name of the Case

T. Wilson v. The District Collectors and Ors.

Brief Facts

• A petition was filed before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution for allowing Christian prayer services.
• The neighbours of the petitioners had filed a complaint against the practice of the petitioner as a result of which the respondents interfered in the practice.

Contentions Raised

• The petitioner raised the contention that the complaint raised against him has been made out by the neighbour who harboured communal feelings.
• The petitioner tried to bring up the importance group prayers for Christianity.

Analysis

• The prayer meetings were not private rather attendees from other areas also were travelling to attend the prayers.
• The prayer services were Pentecostal prayer services under the “Word of God Ministries Trust” and imparted using mics and speakers.
• The Court referred to verses of the Bible and concluded that there is no verse that requires a specific manner of prayer.

Observation of the Court

• The Court held that the premises should only be used for the purpose of conducting prayer meetings.
• Also the petitioner has to seek permission according to law if he further wishes for conducting prayer hall services.
• Rule 4 (3) of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Building Rules, 1997 prescribes for the person to obtain proper permission for conducting such a service.
• The Court condemned the actions of the petitioner stating that no religion takes a person away from truth so the petitioner being an ardent follower should not have done so.
• The right to religious practices though is a fundamental right but is not absolute and cannot be used infringing rights of others.

What do you think of the judgement? Let us know in the section below!