logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide

24

  •            

 
CDJ 2025 Ker HC 1745 print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Kerala
Case No : WP(C) No. 44899 of 2025
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. JAYAKUMAR
Parties : N. Prakash Versus The Cochin Devaswom Board, Represented By Its Secretary Swaraj Round North, Thrissur & Others
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: N. Prakash, (Party-In-Person). For the Respondents: K.P. Sudheer, SC, CDB, S. Rajmohan, SR. GP.
Date of Judgment : 03-12-2025
Head Note :-
Comparative Citation:
2025 KER 93419,
Judgment :-

V. Raja Vijayaraghavan, J.

1. The petitioner, an ardent devotee of the Sree Poornathrayeesa Temple, has approached this Court aggrieved by the action of the 2nd respondent in engaging strong-arm security personnel, wearing T-shirts emblazoned with the word “bouncer”, to control devotees in the Sree Poornathrayeesa Temple, Thrippunithura, during the period from 22.11.2025 to 25.11.2025. His contention is that the deployment of such individuals within the sacred precincts of a temple for the purpose of managing and directing devotees is wholly inappropriate and fundamentally incompatible with the sanctity, decorum, and cultural ethos that the temple environment demands. To substantiate his contentions, the petitioner has also produced before this Court video clips depicting the temple festival and the conduct of the personnel in question.

2. We had directed the learned Standing Counsel for the Cochin Devaswom Board to obtain instructions in the matter.

3. Sri. K. P. Sudheer, the learned Standing Counsel, submitted that, ten days prior to the commencement of the festival, a substantial number of members of the Temple Advisory Committee tendered their resignations. It is further submitted that the temple had earlier engaged ex-servicemen as security personnel; however, owing to the enormous and unmanageable crowds that thronged the temple, they were unable to effectively regulate devotee movement. It was in these compelling circumstances that the security agency was engaged. The learned Standing Counsel, however, fairly submitted that it was unfortunate that individuals wearing T-shirts emblazoned with the word “bouncer” were deployed during the festival. He assures this Court that such an incident shall not recur in future, and that the Devaswom Board will ensure that necessary decorum is maintained in all temple-related arrangements.

4. We record the submissions of the learned Standing Counsel and direct the respondents to exercise due caution hereafter and to refrain from engaging personnel wearing inappropriate attire, including T-shirts bearing the word “bouncer”, for security during temple festivals or within temple precincts.

This Writ Petition is disposed of.

 
  CDJLawJournal