Every stone placed on roadside cannot become an idol, says Madras High Court; laments superstitious beliefs

Madras High Court criticizes superstitious beliefs of treating stones as idols, orders removal of one causing inconvenience to property owners.

The Madras High Court has lamented the “supertitious beliefs” prevailing in the country of placing a stone on a roadside, draping it with a cloth and performing certain rituals around it to claim that it had been elevated to the level of an idol, and therefore, could not be removed at will, irrespestive of the incovenience caused by it to nearby property owners.

Justice N. Anand Venkatesh directed the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Pallavaram Range in Chengalpattu district to remove one such stone that had been placed at the entrance to a private property and wrote that a “very funny situation” would arise if the landlord had to be driven to the city civil court to decide whether it was just a stone or an idol.

“It will become impossible for the civil court to decide whether it is just a stone or it has uplifted itself into the status of an idol. Fortunately, in our country, no court exercises ecclesiastical jurisdiction. It is quite unfortunate that such superstitious beliefs continue to prevail in the society and people do not seem to evolve by passage of time,” he said.

The observations were made while disposing of a writ petition (criminal side) filed by E. Shakthi Murugan seeking a direction to the Assistant Commissioner of Police to provide necessary protection to the Pallavaram Taluk Tahsildar to remove a stone that had been planted outside his property by an individual, Kumaresan. The petitioner said that he was unable to access his property because of the stone.

It was also brought to the notice of the court that a complaint lodged by the petitioner was closed by the police by stating that the dispute was civil in nature. However, on perusing the photographs, the judge said: “It is seen that the stone has been planted right in front of the property belonging to the petitioner. By covering that stone with a green cloth, an attempt is made by someone to call it as an idol.”

Stating that no useful purpose would be served by driving the petitioner to the civil court to establish that it was only a stone and not an idol, the judge said: “In fact, it will be a waste of judicial time to ponder over such a frivolous issue.” The judge directed the Assistant Commissioner of Police to act upon petitioner’s complaint and enable the latter to enjoy his property by removing the stone within a week.