GOPINATH PUJA PANDA SAMANTA Vs. RAMCHANDRA DEB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition arises out of a somewhat unusual criminal case instituted by one of the Puja Pandas attached to the Temple of Lord Jagannath at Puri for the prosecution of Sri Ramachandra Deb, the then Raja of Puri (since deceased), Sri jagat Ballav Das, Dewan of the Temple, Sri P. C. Jagadeb Roy, Commander of the temple, and Shri Jamuna Kar and Sri Bhima Padhy, Pushpalaks sebaks attached to the Temple, for offences under Sections 295, 295-A, 420 and 504, Indian Penal code. The complaint was filed before the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Puri, who after enquiry dismissed the same. On revision, the then Additional Sessions Judge of ganjam-Nayagarh upheld the order of the Sub-divisional Magistrate, holding that no prima facie case was made out against the opposite parties. Hence this revision petition.

(2.) THE substance of the allegations made by the petitioner against the opposite parties is as follows. In the Temple of Lord Jagannath at Puri the Puja Pandas form a class of Sebaks who alone, according to the customary religious practices prevalent in the Temple, have the exclusive right to offer Bhog (Neivedya) to the Lord and no other sebak of the Temple, even though he may be a Brahmin, is entitled to perform this function. On 21-3-1954 when the morning Dhoopa and bhog were offered to the Lord some of the vessels containing the Bhog were kept outside the inner sanctum (Muruj ). According to the religious tenets and usages such Bhog is unfit to be offered to the Lord and therefore the Puja Pandas directed the removal of that Bhog by the Brahmin Sebaks known as Suars (cooks) attached to the Temple. But in spite of their directions the suars got the said Bhog removed by Sudra bhojyas; and this, according to the petitioner had the effect of polluting the whole place and 'mahasnan' (sacred bath) was required to be performed by way of a purificatory ceremony and until such Mahasnan was performed the other daily Nitis to the Lord were held up. When this pollution was brought to the notice of Shri jagat Ballav Das, the Dewan of the Temple, he directed the performance of the other Nitis without performing Mahasnan. The Temple Commander, Sri Jagadeb roy also supported him and ab used the Puja Pandas because they refused to perform the other Nitis until Mahasnan was done. The dispute was then taken before the Raja of Puri who is the Superintendent of the Temple. He supported the action of the Dewan and the Commander of the Temple saying that the performance of Mahasnan would be expensive and that the other Nitis may somehow be performed by merely sprinkling sacred water. The Puja Pandas, in a body, refused to obey his orders saying that this would be against the religious tenets. Thereupon the Raja of Puri directed the Pushpalak sebaks, namely Jamuna Kar and Bhima Padhy and some other persons, to perform the remaining Nitis. They also at first protested, but ultimately thought it wise to obey the orders of the Raja of Puri and perform the daily Nitis, including the offering of Bhog to the Lord at Bhoga Mandap. The Bhog was subsequently sold to the general public as Mahaprasad. According to the petitioner that Bhog was not mahaprasad inasmuch as (1) the pollution in the Temple had not been removed by proper purificatory rites and (2) the Bhog was not offered to the Lord with proper mantras by the Puja Pandas who alone have the exclusive right to offer such Bhog. The petitioner further alleged that all the members of the opposite party knew fully well the religious usages prevalent in the Temple and that the Bhog offered by the Pushapalaks at Bhoga Mandap would not be Mahaprasad and yet they deceived the general public by holding out that it was duly consecrated mahaprasad.

(3.) THE elaborate daily rituals performed in the Temple of Lord Jagannath at Puri, the various classes of Sebaks attached to the Temple, and the duties assigned to them either by custom or according to the religious tenets prescribed in the sacred books, have been described at some length in a recent report dated 15-3-1954 prepared by the Special Officer appointed under the Puri Jagannath Temple (Administration) Act 1952 which was published in Law Department Notification No. 5405-J. T. A. 9/54 J. T. A. dated 6-9-1954 in the Orissa Gazette Extraordinary dated 8-9-1954. The record of rights of the various sebaks of the Temple have also been described in detail in two other reports published along with the Special Officer's report. Law department Notification No. 2298 J. T. A. dated S6-4-1955 and No. 2719 J, T. A. /3/55 J. T. A. dated 30-5-1956, published respectively in the issues of the Orissa gazette extraordinary dated 7-5-1955 and 12-6-1956. It is unnecessary to describe them in great detail for the purpose of this revision petition. It is sufficient to say that the Raja of Puri, as the Superintendent of the temple, exercises some sort of general control and supervision over the work of all classes of sebaks attached to the Temple. The Puja Pandas are high class brahmins who perform the service of offering Bhog (Neivedya) to the Lord at the time of the various daily Pujas which, after such offering, becomes Mahaprasad. Another class of Sebaks known as Pushpalaks (Sinharis) perform the ceremony of dressing the Lord with cloths and flowers at all times and also do the Abakash puja. The Pushapalaks also appear to be high class Brahmins inasmuch as it is admitted that there is inter-marriage between Puja Pandas and Pushapalaks. The suars who cook the Bhog which after being offered to the Lord becomes mahaprasad. are also Brahmins. The Special Officer's report further shows that the elaborate daily rituals of the temple have been accurately described in a chronicle known as Madala Panji which was first compiled several centuries ago, under the instructions of the then rulers of Orissa and that some of the old Panjis are still available with some sebaks of the Temple known as 'tadau-karans'. There is also another book known as 'niladri Mahodaya' in Sanskrit dealing with the daily Nitis of the Temple, but the special officer in his report throws some doubt on the genuineness of this book, though he does not reject it altogether. His conclusion on the subject is as follows: "the Madala Panji to all purposes, and Niladri Mahodaya to some extent, are being referred to when questions relating to daily Nitis arise.