JUST during the last week on Friday, August 18, 2023, Justice J K Maheshwari and Justice K V Vishwanathan, at the Supreme Court have issued notice to the respondents – Nagpur Municipal Corporation, City Police Commissioner, Nagpur, Maharashtra Cultural Affairs Department Secretary to file their submissions in four weeks, in reply to the special leave petition filed by Ramdaspeth Plot-owners Residents Association, challenging the order passed by a Bombay High Court division bench at Nagpur, on September 26, 2022, while disposing of the writ petition of Pawan Shyamsundar Sarda, Rahul Dalmia and Dr. Shubhangi Deshmane against limitations placed by the HC on Dandiya and Garba festivities during the Navaratra Festival at the playground of Mor Hindi Upper Primary School, Ramdaspeth, Nagpur.

 

Precisely, through the impugned order passed on September 26, 2022, the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay HC had granted permission to the petitioner –Association before the Supreme Court, for the time being “to engage in Dandiya and Garba Performances in a traditional and purely religious way without using any loud musical instruments or drums or tom-tom or sound system or DJ or the like”. Further, the Association has been ordered to strictly abide by its commitments made in the MoU of September 27, 2019, in favour of the writ petitioners. Now the petitioner- Association has contended that while passing the impugned order the HC has lost sight of the spirit of the MoU, under which the concerns of the objectors were sought to be redressed in the hope of getting an alternate site, but having failed in obtaining the same they are justified in seeking once again, the school land of the Nagpur Municipal Corporation for the Festival and permission from the Police Authorities, which were granted to them. It has been also contended for the Supreme Court’s consideration that the Dandiya and Garba performances without music is neither practical not enjoyable and the HC was not justified in restraining them, particularly, when the area is not a ‘Silence Zone’ and residents of the area whole heartedly support and participate in these festivities. This SLP before the Supreme Court is piloted by Advocate Sudheer Voditel from Nagpur. The HC division bench has noted in the impugned order passed by it that in ‘Devi Navaratra Festival’ a form of Goddess ‘Shakti’ is worshipped over ‘nine nights’ period and worship would be effective only if it is done with proverbial ‘Eklavya’s concentration’, without any hesitation, without ant disturbance in or from the mind or the atmosphere around us and without causing any disturbance to others.

 

This give rise to a question- whether such celebration can be done in breach of the Rule declaring the area to be a silence zone. The HC’s answer to this question is an obvious ‘no’. No offering of solely concentrated devotion to the presiding deity of Navratra festival is possible unless there is full concentration of mind, all energies of body and mind are focused on nothing but the deity and there is gradual shedding of one’s own identity till the realisation of the supreme reality or the truth. This State of being has been described in Mandukya Upanishad as, “cessation of all phenomena; it is all peace, all bliss and non dual”. Such a State can be achieved in various ways but one can choose to begin his spiritual journey through worship of the deity and expression of his devotion to the deity with attention on nothing but on the deity only. Obviously, therefore, a true devotee would like to express his devotion and offer his worship to the deity without any disturbance of any kind from the outside world and he himself would not cause any problem to others through his worship or otherwise, there would be a possibility of the devotee deviating from his object of worship and devotion.

 

If any act of worship by a devotee causes annoyance or disturbance to others, there would be possibility of a rebounding action of same type of disturbance or even greater disturbance from others. It then follows that every offering of worship or devotion to the presiding deity of Navratra Festival be done with great care and a devotee must ensure that by his or her actions, the discipline and sanctity of the Festival are not sacrificed. What is to be sacrificed by a devotee is his/her own indiscretion and indiscipline. The HC has stated in the impugned order that to answer the second question, it is necessary to consider rival arguments.

 

The Court’s attention was invited by the writ petitioners’ counsel, Rahul Bhangde to the law declared by the HC in the case- Dr Mahesh Vijay Bedekar v. State of Maharashtra-2016 SCC OnLine Bom 9422, wherein a view has been taken that there is no need for declaration of any public place as a silence zone, when the hospital or the educational institution or both are situated within 100 meters, from such a place. The law declared by the HC further shows that in silence zones, use of any sound amplifiers or beating of drums or playing of any music or tom-tom or blowing a horn either musical or pressure, or trumpet or playing any sound instrument is not permissible. The HC has pointed out that the position obtaining today is that in silence zones there cannot be playing of any loudspeaker or public address system/musical system and even beating of drums or tom-tom or blowing of horns etc. This position answers the second question posed by it (the HC) effectively.

 

Turning to the facts of this case, the HC has observed that the basic issue involved in this petition is prohibition upon use of music or sound system while celebrating a religious festival in a silence zone. In view of the facts of and law applicable to those facts in this case, all the restrictions and prohibitions as contained in Rule 3(5) of the Rules, 2000, as it stood originally before amendment would apply to the facts of this case. All the consequences of prohibitions as provided under Rule 6 would also follow. So this means, no Dandiya and Garba can be permitted without imposing prohibitions contained in the said Rule. This is all the more so, as the Petitioner herein, the Association has already admitted that the venue has common compound wall with Dr Arneja’s Hospital. Further, there is also a Memo of understanding signed on September 27, 2019, between the writ petitioners on one side and organisers of the Festival on the other. The MoU bears signatures of eight members of the Association and is binding on it.