Temple Is Public, Not Trustees' Property: Rajasthan High Court Quashes Trespass FIR Against Worshipper

The Superintendent of Police, Udaipur received a complaint of some individuals creating chaos at a temple. During the inquiry respondent No. 2, a Sub-Inspector, recorded statements and obtained a video CD; his report, stating that the video showed the petitioner and others trying to enter the temple forcibly by cutting the lock on the door, led to FIR No. 217/2024 of 14.05.2024 at Police Station Ambamata (paras 1-2). The trustees claimed to have erected barricades to stop worshippers going beyond a certain point, which the accused allegedly tried to cross forcibly; the Trust itself filed no police complaint (para 4). The petitioner sought quashing; counsel for the Trust, not a party, was also heard (paras 1, 3).

Read with Sections 141, 143, 427, 442 and 448 IPC, the allegations ex facie disclosed no criminal intent: the petitioner's primary object, concededly, was to access a public temple, a lawful act, and nothing showed an intent to cause harm, damage property or disrupt public order, so no prima facie case was made out (paras 5-6). A temple is a public place of worship open to all regardless of caste, creed or social standing; private trustees who restrict access with barricades or locks violate the right guaranteed by Article 25 and cannot deprive any section, particularly the marginalised, of worship (para 7). The FIR appeared to be an abuse of process, and the Trust's not complaining itself raised questions about its genuineness (para 7). Given the petitioner's Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe background, the denial of access and the complaint could very well be caste-based discrimination, offending equality and dignity (paras 8, 11). The video and photographs showed at most an attempt to cross a barricade, without force, violence or damage, so trespass and mischief were not made out (paras 9, 12). With no violent intent or public disturbance, unlawful assembly did not stand either (para 10).