Did people die due to worship at home? The administration removed the idol ,what did the HC say?

The Madras High Court, while delivering its verdict in a case, stated that state authorities cannot take action based on superstition, unscientific facts, or public fears. If a person is peacefully performing a ritual in a private residence, there can be no interference, nor can the state bow to public superstition.The case, which came up for hearing in the Madras High Court, was from Chennai. A man named Karthik had installed idols of the Hindu goddess Shivashakthi Daksheswari and the deities Vinayagar and Veerabhadran in his private residence. Subsequently, residents blamed the idols for unnatural deaths in the area and complained to the administration. The administration took action and removed the idols, leading to the High Court's decision.The High Court, in its ruling on April 3, 2025, rejected the administration's argument. In its ruling, the High Court stated that the administration's actions were neither supported by law nor by any principle of devotion or science. The court stated that the Constitution mandates state administrations to foster a scientific outlook among the public.The court then ordered the administration to return the statues, with certain restrictions. However, when this remained unfulfilled after a long period of time, Kartik filed a contempt of court case. According to Kartik, the administration has still not returned his statues. Furthermore, residents have threatened to resort to violence if the statues are reinstalled.Presenting its case before the court, the state administration stated that the petitioner had permission only to construct a residence at the site. He had converted the private residence into a temple without any permission, where worship is performed at midnight, causing inconvenience to local residents.Justice Chakravarti stated that the idols belong to the petitioner, and therefore, they should be returned immediately. Furthermore, if the administration has any concerns about illegal construction, separate legal action can be taken. The court reiterated that worship on private premises should never be conducted in a manner that disrupts public order. Furthermore, the court warned the state administration that such action cannot be taken based on superstition.