The court criticised the administration for amplifying mistrust instead of mediation, rejected claims about custom and public order, and held that authorities cannot veto long associated religious practices through speculative fears or administrative convenience.
The court held that statutory safeguards under the HR&CE Act were violated, rejected government orders attempting to revive the sale, and ruled that trustees are custodians of temple property, not owners with unfettered powers.
Poorna Chandran left a voice message to a friend, later shared with his family, expressing his intent to end his life in protest against the DML government’s refusal to permit lighting the sacred lamp at the traditional "Deepathoon" atop the hill
Senior Advocate Sriram accused the state authorities of being biased against Hindus and said that the state wanted coexistence at the cost of Hindus surrendering their rights
The move to impeach Justice GR Swaminathan for enforcing the Karthigal Deepam order deepens fears that opposition parties are weaponising impeachment to pressure courts and punish judges who refuse to yield to political or ideological demands.
The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court adopted a stern approach on Wednesday (3rd December) while hearing two separate contempt petitions filed against...
Despite a clear High Court order, officials blocked access to the Deepathoon pillar, stopped the petitioner escorted by CISF and triggered clashes with devotees, prompting strong criticism from BJP leaders and raising fresh concerns over state interference in Hindu rituals.
Justice G.R. Swaminathan said that lighting the Deepam on a hilltop is an old Tamil practice, and the very purpose of the Deepam is to hold a ceremonial flame.
The article titled "Ayodhya of the South - A timeline of time immemorial," which was published on 5th November, attempted to peddle distorted facts and falsehoods to propagate the dubious narrative of Muslim victimhood.