On May 27, 1953, EV Ramaswami Naicker smashed an idol of Lord Ganesha in public at the Town Hall maidan in Tiruchirappalli .
he had made a speech announcing his intention to do this before breaking the idol.
Veerabadran Chettiar, filed a case against Naicker under two laws.
Section 295: Section 295-A:
The Tiruchirappalli magistrate dismissed the petition stating that simply because the mud figure resembled Lord Ganesh it cannot become an object held sacred.
The sessions judge dismissed the appeal. saying the idol was the private property of those who broke it.
The High court Judge dismissed the appeal saying that No offence was made out as the idol broken did not come within the scope of “any object held sacred by any class of persons”.
An idol in a temple or one in a religious procession would, he clarified, but not any object resembling a deity. Even a toy in such a shape would otherwise qualify as being sacred.
Judgement can be found here indiankanoon.org/doc/672727/
The Supreme court said the high court was wrong to have imported meaning into the words “held sacred”. It was not necessary for the object to have been worshipped for it to be sacred. For instance, the Bible, the Quran and the Guru Granth Sahib were also objects held sacred.
Justice (later chief justice) B P Sinha asked the judiciary to be circumspect in such matters and consider the feelings and religious emotions, irrespective of whether or not they share those beliefs, or whether they are rational or otherwise, in the opinion of the court.
The Supreme court Judgement can be found here indiankanoon.org/doc/165707/
While dismissing the appeal The judgement stated
