No Legal Bar In Minor Becoming A Swami, Amicus Tells Karnataka High Court; Judgment Reserved On Legality Of 'Bala Sanyasa'

The Karnataka High Court on Thursday reserved its order on a petition questioning the legality of appointing 16-year-old Aniruddha Saralathaya (now named as Vedavardhana Tirtha) as the Peetadhipathi of the Shiroor Mutt in Udupi. A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum heard the parties for over four hours and reserved their order. Advocate D R Ravishankar appeared for the petitioner P. Lathavya Acharya and Ors. submitted that "A minor cannot be forced with doing what is not suiting his age. Anointing a minor as chief pontiff amounts to imposing material abandonment on the child, which is in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution. In substance, there cannot be a sannyasa because that will require him (minor) to include material abandonment." Relying on Article 39 (e) (f) of the Constitution of India and Article 21, it was contended that "Article 21 and Article 39 have to be read conjointly and thus it becomes an integral part of right to life with dignity. A child cannot be forced to adopt or abandon moral and material abandonment." The petition states that "In the present case, the minor is imposed with Sanyasa while the authorities concerned have remained dormant and inactive permitting the rights of the minor child being violated. The minor / Respondent No.7 is also not from an affluent background and perhaps the economic condition has been misused in even taking the Child's Parents into confidence in undertaking this exercise and needless to state that under the scheme of the extant laws relating to the rights of a guardian, even a guardian, whether legal or natural is not empowered to give any consent for material abandonment or imposition of Sanyasa on the minor child." Ravishankar concluded by saying:"This practice imposing sanyasa on a minor is anti-constitutional and it is an obligation on part of the state government as enshrined under Article 39, to protect children from being forced to take up sanyasa." On the other hand, counsel appearing for the respondents 5 and 6 (Sode Vadiraja Mutt and Sri Vishwavallabha Tirtha swami of Sri Sode Vadiraj Mutt ) submitted that "The previous head (pontiff) died in 2018, the office was kept vacant they did not find a suitable person. Eventually, when they located this boy after looking at his interest in Dharmashastra and all associated activities with spiritual science, he was chosen by Respondent 6, as a fit candidate." Further, it was said that "This practise of Bala-sanyasa has been there since 800 odd years. All the Astha mathas from their inception have had bala-sanyasi as peethadhipathis, who have efficiently and successfully managed and administered Sri Krishna Matha and their respective Astha Matha's." Moreover, it was said for 18 months there was no quarrel as regards the administration of the affairs of the mutt. Only these four persons have come before the court, questioning the appointment of resp 7. There is no public interest involved in the present case, apart from these petitioners no followers of the Shirur mutt have come forward with any complaint on the anointment. It was claimed that "Prior to the present petition, the same petitioners have filed a criminal complaint against the respondent 6 alleging misappropriation of funds, the trial court has rejected the complaint, having failed there the petitioners have come before this court. This petition is to settle scores with resp 6." The counsel also submitted that:"Your (petitioners) right to profess religion is not affected by my appointment of resp 7. Moreover, if somebody wants to become celibate at the age of 16 years, law does not prevent it." In regards to the submission that fundamental rights of the minor will be affected the counsel for respondent said "The appointment of Peedathipathi of Shiroor Mutt is also well within the policies formulated by the Central government from time to time including the National Policy for Children, 2013." It added,"As Peedathipathi of the Shri Shiroor Matha, he is not denied or deprived of any of his rights flowing to him under the above-mentioned laws or policies. The Peedathipathi pursues his education by learning the Vedas, Upanishads, philosophy of Shriman Madhwacharya to do which he had always shown keen interest, profound love and desire. He is not abused or forced to do any avocations unsuited to his age or strength nor is he forced to carry out the duties attached to the post of a Peedathipathi owing to any economic necessity or need. In Shri Shiroor Matha, he has all the opportunity and facilities for wholesome development of his person and personality in a conducive environment," It was also said that "Even the Constitution of India mandates state governments to provide every child education up to 14 years. The mutts impart education and they (pontiff) are taught everything...

No Legal Bar In Minor Becoming A Swami, Amicus Tells Karnataka High Court; Judgment Reserved On Legality Of 'Bala Sanyasa'

Mustafa Plumber

Tags