The Supreme Court recently raised worry over the uncontrolled number of devotees who attend places of worship located in national parks and sanctuaries.
“In many of the forests in such Protected Areas, there are places of worship where devotees flock by the thousands and lakhs. On the one hand, the authorities cannot prevent such devotees from visiting places of worship. On the other hand, such unregulated visits by devotees cause issues with the management of such Protected Areas,” a bench comprised of Justices BR Gavai and Vikram Nath stated.
The bench made these findings while reviewing a report filed by Amicus Curiae K Parameshwar on the impact of worshippers visiting a temple in Rajasthan’s Sariska tiger reserve.
According to the findings, the enormous number of devotees visiting the forest has had a negative impact on the Tiger Reserve’s management. The note was based on the report of the State Empowered Committee on the Management of the Sariska Tiger Reserve and the temple situated within it.
The Court observed that the issue addressed is likewise a source of concern in several other National Parks and Sanctuaries with places of worship.
The bench of Justices B.R. Gavai and Vikram Nath stated, “We find that the note prepared by the learned Amicus Curiae is an attempt to resolve this critical issue. As a result, we believe that the ideas should be evaluated for adoption, at least on a trial basis.”
According to the conclusions of the Amicus Curiae, the temple receives thousands of visitors each day. This number can reach the lakhs on special occasions such as fairs.
It was claimed that the uncontrolled number of devotees visiting the forest has a negative impact on the Tiger Reserve’s management.
The Amicus Curiae proposed that, in order to monitor devotee movement within the forest, only electric buses be permitted to enter the forest to visit the temple.
He said that the electric buses will transport devotees from the Tiger Reserve’s entry gate to the temple and back in the same manner.
The statement also mentioned that, even though the park is closed during the rainy season, devotees still visit the temple during that time, complicating forest management even more.
In view of the foregoing, the Court determined that the ideas should be examined for implementation, at least on a trial basis.
Before issuing any orders, the Court found it necessary to hear from the State of Rajasthan, as well as the Union of India’s Ministries of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change and Road Transport and Highways.
Furthermore, the Court has served notice on the matter on the Union of India through the Principal Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forests, and Climate Change, and the State of Rajasthan through its Chief Secretary.
