Shillong, Sep 16 A district administration cannot assume the role of an ecclesiastical tribunal to resolve a church's internal dispute, the Meghalaya High Court has said while quashing the East Khasi Hills district deputy commissioner's orders restricting pastoral care and religious services at the Mawkhar Presbyterian Church.
The court, while partly allowing a writ petition filed by the Church, has ruled that the state could take preventive measures to maintain public order but could not use such powers to determine competing ecclesiastical rights or the jurisdiction of different presbyterian synods.
"The existence of a dispute between two groups cannot, by itself, confer unlimited jurisdiction upon the executive authority to regulate the internal affairs of a religious denomination," Justice H S Thangkhiew said on Tuesday.
The dispute within the Mawkhar Presbyterian Church traces its origin to a controversy in 2019, when an unexplained deficit of about Rs 2.86 crore was detected. An audit subsequently confirmed alleged misappropriation of roughly Rs 4.65 crore, and an FIR was registered on August 3, 2019, over an alleged fraud involving Rs 3.26 crore, according to the judgment.
The controversy later widened following a dispute over the suspension and removal of pastor Reverend M Pyngrope and the Church's affiliation with the Khasi Jaintia Presbyterian Synod Sepngi.
The congregation passed a resolution on February 1, 2026, seeking to dissociate from the Synod Sepngi, leading to rival claims over the Church's administration and whether the KJP Synod Mihngi could provide pastoral care.
Amid complaints, counter-complaints and criminal proceedings between the rival groups, the district administration imposed a series of restrictions, including a ban on meetings in the Church's schools, halls and premises and a direction against external interference.
On June 19, the deputy commissioner directed the KJP Synod Mihngi to stop providing pastoral care and administering sacraments at the Church, relying on clarifications from the Presbyterian Church of India on ecclesiastical jurisdiction.
The High Court said such a determination was beyond the deputy commissioner's jurisdiction.
"It cannot conclusively determine which Synod possesses ecclesiastical jurisdiction merely by relying upon the internal Constitution of the Presbyterian Church of India," the court said.
It quashed the show-cause notice issued on May 13 and the two orders dated June 19, saying they sought to determine or regulate ecclesiastical jurisdiction and religious functions.
The court also interfered with the May 8 communication and March 12 directions to the extent that they imposed a blanket or indefinite prohibition on the Church's internal administration and functioning.
The high court bench clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the validity of the February 1 resolution, the appointment or removal of pastors or office bearers, the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of either Synod, or the rival claims over management and control of the church.
It said authorities would remain free to take lawful action against any actual or imminent threat to public peace, violence, trespass, intimidation, destruction of property or other cognisable offence.
The parties were left free to pursue their remedies before competent ecclesiastical, civil or statutory forums. The writ petition was accordingly partly allowed and disposed of.
