Bureau Prayagraj. Almost every small and big famous temple in India has a separate line or special pass for VIP darshan. After paying some fixed amount or ticket money, any person can avoid the long queues and directly reach the sanctum sanctorum of the Lord for darshan. However, questions have been raised from time to time on this special facility given on the basis of money and influence. One such serious case has now reached the doorstep of Madras High Court.
Considering the sensitivity of the matter, the High Court has expressed deep concern over this special facility given in temples on the basis of money and VIP status. The court said in blunt words that there can be no difference between whether a minister or a common man is in the court of God. All human beings are equal before God, hence there is no justification for this evil practice of VIP darshan inside temples.
According to the report of ‘Live Law’, the division bench of Justice GR Swaminathan and Justice Lakshminarayanan of Madras High Court raised very sharp questions during the hearing of this case. Questioning the practice of VIP darshan in temples, the court asked whether there is any difference between an influential minister and a common citizen in front of God? The court said in a strong tone that no matter what administrative procedure is decided for darshan, it should not cause any kind of trouble or mental trauma to the common devotees standing in the queues of the temple.
The bench of Justice G R Swaminathan came down hard on the VIP culture, saying, “Ministers and MLAs should remove from their minds the misconception that God is waiting for them in the temple, and they can directly enter the temple at any time on the basis of their influence. This should not happen at all. After all, why do we need this VIP philosophy? When all people are completely equal before God, then what are the ministers and what is the common public.”
Additional Solicitor General PV Balasubramaniam, appearing for the government, presented his side on these tough and sharp questions of the court. While advocating the VIP philosophy, he argued that by following such a practice, on one hand, one gets relief from the long queues formed due to special people, on the other hand, temples also get huge income (revenue) from VIP tickets. Along with this argument, he sought some time from the court to file a detailed reply of the government on this subject. Accepting this request of the government, the High Court has given it six weeks time to submit a complete reply.
Actually, this whole legal dispute has started regarding a temple visit of R Nirmal Kumar, who recently became a minister in the Vijay government. Very serious allegations were leveled against Minister Nirmal Kumar that when he arrived for darshan, due to his influence the doors of the historic Subramanya Swamy temple located at Tiruparankundram were completely closed for the general public. After this, when the minister had darshan comfortably, the temple was reopened for the common devotees.
However, these serious allegations made by the opposition have been completely rejected by the Vijay government. This PIL has been filed in the Madras High Court by P. Chokkalingam, senior leader of the Tamil Nadu unit of Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP). He claimed in the court that like Minister Nirmal Kumar, every day many big leaders, ministers and MLAs flout the protocol for VIP darshan in temples, due to which common devotees from far and wide have to face a lot of trouble by standing in the sun and in queues for hours.
He said in his petition that Sanatan Dharma does not allow discrimination against any person on the basis of wealth, social status, position or caste, hence all devotees should be treated completely equally within the temple. However, petitioner Chokalingam in his plea has also sought some special exemptions on practical grounds. He said that senior citizens, disabled people, pregnant women, newly married couples, local artists performing their art in the temple, apart from this, the country’s heads of state and officials holding constitutional posts (like the President, Governor or Chief Justice) should be exempted from this rule and given some special concessions, but this should not be taken advantage of for political gains.
Comments are closed.