9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Nature of the Charusila Trust (private or public). 2. Applicability of the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950, to the Charusila Trust. 3. Constitutional validity of the Act concerning fundamental rights. 4. Extra-territorial application of the Act. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Nature of the Charusila Trust (private or public): The primary issue was whether the Charusila Trust was a private endowment created for the worship of a family idol or a public religious trust. The High Court had held that the trust was private, emphasizing that the deity Iswar Srigopal was initially installed in the settlor's house for family worship. However, the Supreme Court disagreed, noting several clauses in the trust deed indicating public involvement. The trust deed allowed public worship and offerings, detailed large-scale festivals, and included non-family trustees. The establishment of a hospital and charitable dispensary further indicated a public trust. The Court concluded that the trust was of a public nature, benefiting the general body of worshippers and the public. 2. Applicability of the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950, to the Charusila Trust: The High Court had quashed proceedings under the Act, holding it inapplicable to the private trust. However, the Supreme Court found that the trust was public, thus falling within the Act's purview. The Act applies to all public religious trusts in Bihar, including those with properties outside Bihar, provided the religious institution itself is in Bihar. The Supreme Court emphasized that the Act aimed to ensure better administration and protection of properties of Hindu religious trusts in Bihar. 3. Constitutional validity of the Act concerning fundamental rights: In related appeals, the Supreme Court had already upheld the constitutional validity of the Act, stating that it did not infringe on fundamental rights guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution. The Court reiterated this position, confirming that the Act's provisions were constitutionally sound and did not abridge any rights conferred by the Constitution. 4. Extra-territorial application of the Act: The respondent argued that the Act's application to properties outside Bihar was ultra vires the Bihar Legislature's powers. The Supreme Court rejected this argument, stating that the Act applied to trusts situated in Bihar, even if they had properties outside the state. The Court noted that the Act aimed to control the trustees in personam and ensure the trust's proper administration. The territorial connection between the trust in Bihar and its properties elsewhere was deemed sufficient to justify the Act's application. The Court applied the doctrine of territorial connection or nexus, previously used in tax legislation cases, to uphold the Act's provisions. Conclusion: The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's judgment, and dismissed the petition of Srimati Charusila Dasi. The Charusila Trust was deemed a public religious trust subject to the Bihar Hindu Religious Trusts Act, 1950, and the Act's application was found constitutionally valid and territorially justified.
|
