Relocation of consecrated idol illegal, says Andhra Pradesh High Court

VIJAYAWADA: The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Friday made it clear that an idol of a presiding deity in a temple (mula virat) consecrated and installed in accordance with sacred scriptures and religious beliefs cannot be shifted to another place.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice DVSS Somayajulu overruled the verdict of single-judge in a case pertaining to the Mahankali Amma Temple at Issappalem village in Narasaraopet mandal, Palnadu district.

The bench said relocating the mula virat of a temple is against the scriptures and Agamas. Any act in violation of the religious beliefs and traditions is a constitutional violation, it ruled.

Terming the relocation of the idol at Mahankali Amma Temple in the name of temple reconstruction illegal and unilateral, the court directed the endowments department commissioner not to relocate even the statue of Gunji Chukkamma from the place.

Mahankali Amma Temple was constructed in 1976 at Issappalem and over the years, it has become popular with a large number of devotees visiting it for various rituals including Anna Prasanna, and Askharabhyasam.

The statue of Gunji Chukkamma, who contributed to the development of the temple, was also installed on the temple premises. A new temple premises with wider space was proposed a few years ago on the ground that the temple premises was congested.

However, challenging the decision to relocate the idols of the presiding deity and Chukkamma, the temple hereditary trustees Yellanti Renuka and Dara Navaneeta Bai filed a petiton in the high court in 2021.

Simultaneously, AV Narasimha Rao, the present temple caretaker, filed another petition seeking orders to expedite the works of the new temple.

Hearing both the petitions, Justice R Raghunandan Rao dismissed Renuka and Navaneeth Bai’s petiton, stating that they failed to establish that shifting of the idol will hurt the sentiments of the devotees.

Both the hereditary trustees went for an appeal against the verdict and made AV Narasimha Rao as a respondent. Endowments department officials filed a counter stating that relocation was in accordance with rules. They claimed the temple was in a dilapidated condition.

After hearing the arguments, the division bench ruled that relocation of mula vart is against scriptures and in violation of Article 26 (B).

VIJAYAWADA: The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Friday made it clear that an idol of a presiding deity in a temple (mula virat) consecrated and installed in accordance with sacred scriptures and religious beliefs cannot be shifted to another place. A division bench comprising Chief Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice DVSS Somayajulu overruled the verdict of single-judge in a case pertaining to the Mahankali Amma Temple at Issappalem village in Narasaraopet mandal, Palnadu district. The bench said relocating the mula virat of a temple is against the scriptures and Agamas. Any act in violation of the religious beliefs and traditions is a constitutional violation, it ruled. Terming the relocation of the idol at Mahankali Amma Temple in the name of temple reconstruction illegal and unilateral, the court directed the endowments department commissioner not to relocate even the statue of Gunji Chukkamma from the place. Mahankali Amma Temple was constructed in 1976 at Issappalem and over the years, it has become popular with a large number of devotees visiting it for various rituals including Anna Prasanna, and Askharabhyasam. The statue of Gunji Chukkamma, who contributed to the development of the temple, was also installed on the temple premises. A new temple premises with wider space was proposed a few years ago on the ground that the temple premises was congested. However, challenging the decision to relocate the idols of the presiding deity and Chukkamma, the temple hereditary trustees Yellanti Renuka and Dara Navaneeta Bai filed a petiton in the high court in 2021. Simultaneously, AV Narasimha Rao, the present temple caretaker, filed another petition seeking orders to expedite the works of the new temple. Hearing both the petitions, Justice R Raghunandan Rao dismissed Renuka and Navaneeth Bai’s petiton, stating that they failed to establish that shifting of the idol will hurt the sentiments of the devotees. Both the hereditary trustees went for an appeal against the verdict and made AV Narasimha Rao as a respondent. Endowments department officials filed a counter stating that relocation was in accordance with rules. They claimed the temple was in a dilapidated condition. After hearing the arguments, the division bench ruled that relocation of mula vart is against scriptures and in violation of Article 26 (B).