Controversial “ANTI-HINDU” Temple Tax Bill Finally Defeated In The Karnataka Legislative Council

The ‘Hindu Religious Institutions and Charitable Endowments Amendment Bill’, which was introduced by the Karnataka Government, according to which heavy taxes were imposed on the Temples which had an annual revenue exceeding the amount of Rs 1 Crore was defeated finally in the Karnataka Legislative Council.

The bill was earlier passed in the Legislative Assembly with a minimal opposition two days ago.

What did the Bill include

• The Bill introduced changes in the financial contribution rates by the Temple falling under a certain income level for temples based on income levels. 
• It should be noted that in the Karnataka Muzrai Department, approximately 35,000 temples are there. These temples have been divided into three categories on the basis of their annual income: 

1. Group A temples- income falling above an amount of Rs 25 lakh, 
2. Group B temples- income falling between Rs 5 lakh and Rs 25 lakh, and 
3. Group C temples- they constituted the majority, with an income  falling below Rs 5 lakh.

• As per the proposed legislation, temples which generated over an amount of Rs 1 crore on annual basis, would have to mandatorily contribute an amount of 10% to a ‘Common Pool Fund’. 
• Temples earning an annual revenue between Rs 10 lakh to Rs 1 crore would be required to contribute an amount of 5% of the total revenue generated. 
• Temples which earned a revenue of less than Rs 10 lakh were proposed to be exempted from these contributions as per the Bill. 
• Also, the Bill offered for the establishment of a state and district high-level committee to oversee and recommend improvements for the temples falling under the Group A category.

What did the Government say in the favour of the Bill

• The State Government while defending the proposed amendment Bill, argued that amendment was introduced with an objective of supporting the weaker priests as well as  improving the facilities in less affluent temples. 
• Establishment of  a "Common Pool Fund" was proposed by the Government which would be financed by the  contributions from the temples. This fund will be used for:

1. Supporting the priests: would provide welfare measures as well as improved working conditions for priests, especially for priests belonging to the economically weaker backgrounds.
2. Upgrading facilities: To enhance the infrastructure as well as other amenities at lesser affluent temples.
3. Funding the education: To support educational initiatives for children related to such disadvantaged families who have been associated with temples.

• The Chief Minister Siddaramaiah of the state of Karnataka urged that the allegations about the amendments to the Bill "appear to be misrepresented", which aimed to mislead the public as well as tried to polarise people along the communal lines for political leverage.

What did the opposition say in favour of the Bill ?

• The BJP in the opposition mounted scathing critique of the Bill, and raised several concerns, including:

1. Unfair targeting: The opposition argued that the tax unfairly targeted the Hindu temples, when other religious institutions remained exempt. This act showed the discriminatory policy of the Government.
2. Misuse of funds: Concerns were raised about a potential misuse of the collected funds, also questioning the transparency and accountability of such funding as per the Bill.
3. Impact on charitable activities: The critics also argued that such tax will deter the  donations made to the Temple, thus hindering the ability of the temples to undertake such charitable activities benefiting the community.

What happened in the Karnataka legislature

• Out of the 6 states which have a Bicameral Legislature, Karnataka Legislature in one. It includes the-

1. The Karnataka Legislative Council, the upper house, and 
2. The Karnataka Legislative Assembly, the lower house.

• The Bill was defeated in the Legislative COuncil, which is the upper house, where BJP holds majority holding 35 seats, while the ruling Congress has 30 seats. 8 seats of the Janata Dal,and one independent candidate, also voted against the Bill.

Conclusion

The Critics labelled the Bill as ‘anti-Hindu’, was finally defeated amongst the celebrations of the opposition party BJP with the chants of “Jai Sri Ram”. On the other hand, the State Government, led by Congress Leader Siddaramaiah, argued that intent of the not understood properly, which aimed to provide aids to the smaller Temples around the area. 

Sharks of law offers an affordable and easily accessible legal service, for matters related to  civil, criminal or family law. You may contact us, in case you have any legal issue and seek legal advice at any time. 

Email:-helpdesk@sharksoflaw.com

Help Desk:-+91-88770-01993