The Surat police commissioner's May 21 notification banned manufacture of Ganesh idols using clay and plaster of Paris has been challenged by local idol manufacturers before the Gujarat high court.
The Surat police commissioner’s notification on May 21 that banned manufacture of Ganesh idols using clay and plaster of Paris has been challenged by local idol manufacturers before the Gujarat high court.
Taking serious view of the petition, Justice JB Pardiwala, stayed implementation of the notification and asked explanation of the police commissioner and other authorities by June 15 while observing that, “matter deserves consideration.”
The issue is connected with the faith of lakhs of people who celebrate Ganesh festival every year. The festival will start in September and idol makers have already started manufacturing across the state.
The Surat police chief had issued a notification under section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), restraining local idol makers from making Ganesh idols and those of other Gods and Goddesses using clay or plaster of Paris.
The reason for the notification was that the idols when immersed in rivers and other water bodies cause water pollution.
Challenging the notification, BC Dave, counsel for idol makers submitted that, “Section 144 can only be imposed in an emergency situation or one that threatens tranquility.
Also, the commissioner’s apprehension regarding the usage of clay and PoP and possible pollution is not ‘well founded’.”
After hearing the case, Justice Pardiwala raised two questions. First, “whether the Commissioner of Police, Surat City exceeded his jurisdiction under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in passing the impugned notification banning use of clay and plaster of Paris for the purpose of preparing idols of Gods and Goddesses.”
The second question was, “whether the situation was such as to warrant a conclusion on the part of the administration that use of clay and plaster of Paris in preparation of idols of Gods and Goddesses and immersion of the same in rivers and other water bodies have given rise to imminent danger to ‘public health’ and ‘hygiene’.”
The judge further said, “There is no second opinion that anything that affects or is likely to affect ‘public health’, ‘hygiene’ and ‘tranquility’ has to be abhorred.
For that matter, what is needed is proper study to identify those objects and to plan ahead to obliterate those possible hazards before they surface as a menace.”
He also said, “To deal with such an eventuality, necessary laws will have to be enacted. Prima facie, I am of the view that resorting to temporary or emergency powers under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be a permanent solution to those problems.”
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}