The Supreme Court today ordered the Tamil Nadu government not to enforce any unwarranted ban in the State on the live telecast of the Ayodhya Ram Mandir inauguration or related events.
A bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Dipankar Datta noted that the permission to telecast the event cannot be rejected only on grounds like Hindus being a minority in certain areas. Justice Khanna observed that in a homogenous society, the live streaming should not be prevented on the ground that A or B community is there.
Mentioning that the reason Hindus are a minority at some places is atrocious, Justice Datta said that if the reason has to follow then it cannot happen across the State. Meanwhile, Justice Khanna added that the Tamil Nadu government must ensure that no rejection should take place because of the aforesaid reason.
He also mentioned that the Court directed to maintain data in order to note how many granted permission for the live telecast and how many refused. Nonetheless, the Tamil Nadu government assured the Supreme Court that there was no ban on any such event, as opposed to the claims made by the petitioner.
The petitioner approached the Supreme Court stating that there were instructions from the DMK-led government to ban the live telecast of the consecration ceremony of the Ram Lalla Temple at Ayodhya. The plea lodged through Advocate G Balaji stated that Tamil Nadu has prohibited all kinds of rituals and feasts in connection with the Ayodhya event. The petitioner argued that this violates fundamental rights and would lead to a law and order issue.
Appearing for the petitioner, Senior Advocate Dama Sheshadri Naidu argued that a political party (DMK) comes to power and it wants the government to head the religion. However, Justice Sanjiv Khanna noted that there did not seem to be any formal orders in the matter and that the authorities should not act on oral orders.Meanwhile Solicitor General Tushar Mehta urged the Supreme Court to intervene so that a message is sent out that the Constitution applies equally everywhere.
Responding to the Court’s query, Senior Advocate Naidu added that such written orders have been placed on record before the Court. Justice Khanna stated that anybody asking for permission has to be dealt with in accordance with law and oral orders cannot be acted upon.
Representing the Tamil Nadu government, Additional Advocate General Amit Anand Tiwari told the Court that the petition was politically motivated. He added that there are no restrictions at all and that the pleas are politically motivated.
To this, SG Tushar Mehta said that a citizen seeking protection of the Supreme Court for his fundamental rights under Article 25 and 26 can never be termed political.
Subsequently, the Court took the assurance on record and ordered the State to ensure that if any applications to conduct Ram Mandir inauguration related events are rejected, the same should be by way of reasoned orders.