Holding

The interim restraint on the Chunri ceremony remains, and the deposited temple funds may be utilized for the temple’s maintenance and for charitable purposes as directed by the District Magistrate.

Summary

The Supreme Court dealt with a petition challenging an ex‑parte interim order that barred the performance of the Chunri ceremony in Sri Rani Satiji's Mandir and directed that all collections be deposited in a nationalised bank. The petitioners, All India Democratic Women’s Association and Janwadi Samiti, argued that the ceremony glorifies Sati, prohibited under the Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987, and that the temple’s funds should be used for its maintenance and charitable activities. The temple management sought to vacate the order and to retain control over the temple’s assets. The Court held that the restraint on the Chunri ceremony must continue and that, pending final disposal of the writ petition, the temple’s income may be used for its upkeep and for contributions to social institutions, subject to the District Magistrate’s approval. The petition for vacating the interim order was dismissed, and the miscellaneous petition was disposed of accordingly.

Issues considered

Whether the Chunri ceremony performed in the temple constitutes glorification of Sati prohibited under the Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987.
Whether the funds deposited from temple collections may be utilized for the maintenance of the temple complex and for contributions to social institutions, and whether the temple premises can be converted into rehabilitation camps.

Legislation cited

Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987

Subjects

SatiCommission of Sati (Prevention) ActChunri ceremonyTemple fundsMaintenance of religious premisesCharitable contributionsInterim injunctionReligious practicesWomen’s rights

Judgment

A ALL INDIA DEMOCRATIC WOMEN'S ASSOCIATION AND ~
JANWADI SAMIT!
v.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

MARCH 17, 1989
B
[RANGANATH MISRA AND M.N. VENKATACHAL!AH, JJ.] y
Commission ofSati (Prevention) Act, 1987: Chunri Ceremony-
\
Whether glorification of Sati-Maintenance of Sati temple and support .,.
to social institutions of utility out of income earned pending determina-
lion-Permissibility of.
c
By an ex-pa rte order made in the writ petition on 9th September, -'f
1988, the Court prohibited respondent No. 2, the management of the
Sri Rani Satiji's Mandir, from performing Chunri ceremony within the
temple and directed the entire collection of money to be separately
D accounted for and deposited into a nationalised bank.

In this miscellaneous petition, the management sought vacation of
the ad interim order and for a direction to the authorities not to in-
terfere in the matter of collection of money as also articles of gold and
silver of deities. +
E
Disposing of the miscellaneous petition, the Court,

Ordered:

1. The restraint imposed on holding the Chunri ceremony within
F the temple should continue without any variation. [68G-H]

2.1 Pending disposal of the writ petition, the temple complex has
to be maintained. Therefore, out of the income earned maintenance
•·"
expenses must be met. [69A]

G 2.2 If out of the income of this institution any cont;>ihution was
being made to sustain some social institutions of utility, the support .\
should not die out. [69B-C]

2.3 The respondent No. 2 is free to move the District Magistrate
in regard to these two aspects and in case the latter is satisfied that
H appropriate funds should be released out of the deposits in the bank for
66
JANWADJ SAMIT! v. U.0.1. 67

~ one or both of the ;ibove said purposes, he would be free to make an
appropriate order in respect thereof. [69C]
A

ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Civil Misc. Petition No. 28180
of 1988.

IN B
-I
•
Writ Petition No. 913 of 1988
~
. {Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.)

Mrs. K. Hingorani and Ms. Santosh Singh for the Petitioner.
c
y A.K. Sen (Not Present), Dr. L.M. Singhvi, Vivek Gambhir,
Parveen Kumar and B.D. Sharma for the Respondents.

S.P. Singh for the Impleading party.
D
The following Order of the Court was delivered:

ORDER

.~· This Court on 9. 9 .1988 after hearing counsel for the petitioners
in the writ petition made an ex parte order to the following effect: E

.....;. "Issue notice returnable on Tuesday, the 13th Sep-
!ember, 1988. In view of the allegations made in Pargraph 4
of the affidavit given by Vi jay Trivedi, the Respondent No.
2 is prohibited from performing any Chunri Ceremony
'\l within Sri Rani Satiji's Mandir and the respondents are F

• directed to enforce this order on the 10th September, 1988
and on any other occasion thereafter until further orders.
The entire collection of money shall be separately accoun-
ted for and should be deposited into a nationalised bank, so
that appropriate directions after hearing both the parties
may be made by this Court in regard to the same ..... " G
I
On 10th of September, 1988, the annual Satiji Mela was scheduled to
be celebrated within the said temple premises.

The management of the temple, respondent No. 2, in the writ
petition has now applied for vacating the ad interim order and for a H
68 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1989) 2 S.C.R.

A direction to the District Magistrate, Jhunjhunu to return the keys of
the Bhetpatras of the temple and the boxes containing the articles of
J.
gold and silver and also for a direction to him not to interfere in the
matter of collection of money as also collection of articles of gold and
silver of deities located in the premises of the temple and to make such
other orders as may be necessary to meet the situation.
B
We have heard Dr. Singhvi in support of the petition, Mrs. Hing- r
orani for the petitioners in the writ petition asking for sustaining the
interim order and Mr. Sharma for the State of Rajasthan. An affidavit
~
has been filed by the District Magistrate of Jhunjhunu in the course of ,..
hearing which has also been placed before us.
c
Broadly two aspects require consideration: (1) whether the
)'.
'Chunry' ceremony should be permitted to be performed within the
temple and (2) whether out of the amounts which are being deposited
in the nationalised bank in terms of the interim order, the expenses for
maintenance of the temple complex, performance of the daily rites as
D also the usual charities should not be made.

Under the Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987, glorifica-
tion of Sati is strictly prohibited and that act has been declared to be an
offence. Dr. Singhvi by referring to different dictionaries has tried to
impress upon us that Chunry as such is not connected with glorification
-+
E of Sa ti and is a ceremony connected with the traditional form of offer-
ing worship known as Sodash Upachar while Mrs. Hingorani and Mr.
Sharma do not accept the submission made by Dr. Singhvi and have ,._
maintained that in the State of Rajasthan Chunry ceremony is always .I
associated with glorifying Sati and the celebration is a part of the
traditional process of religious offerings in Sati temples. This certainly
F is not the stage in the proceedings for a final view of the question as to
A
whether performance of Chunry ceremony amounts to glorification of ~-
Sati and the determirtation must be left to the final stage. We do not
think it would be appropriate for us to express any view beyond this
point at this stage as the same may embarrass the bench which would
ultimately hear the matter.
G
We are, therefore, of the view that the restraint imposed on
,\:
holding the Chunry ceremony within the temple should continue with-
out any variation. The contention of Dr. Singhvi that Chunry is a part
of Soda sh U pachar will have to be examined at length at the later
"
stage.
H
JANWADI SAMIT! v. U.0.I. 69
I
Now a look at the other aspect. There can be no two opinions A
that pending disposal of the writ petition, the temple complex has to
be maintained and out of the income earned maintenance expense
must be met. The submission advanced by Mrs. Hingorani that the
temple should be converted forthwith into rehabilitation camps for
uncared for ladies is certainly not one requiring any serious considera-
tion. There is no provision in the statute or in any other law which B
would warrant such change of user of the premises.

Similarly if out of the income of this institution any contribution
was being made to sustain some social institutions of utility, the sup-_
port should not die out. The respondent No. 2 is free to move the
District Magistrate of Jhunjhunu in regard to these two aspects and in c
case the District Magistrate is satisfied that appropriate funds should
.l< be released out of the deposits in the bank for one or both of the
purposes indicated above he would be free to direct such money as
may be found necessary to be withdrawn from the bank for being
utilised for the purposes as may be specified by the District Magistrate
m his order to be made. D

This disposes of the Civil Miscellaneous Petition.

J.- P.S.S.