Court Upholds Agreement on Customary Route Amidst Law and Order Concerns
In a significant decision, the Allahabad High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation filed by Sharif Ahmad and others, which sought permission to change the route of the traditional Muharram procession in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh. The court, comprising Justices J.J. Munir and Arun Kumar, upheld the existing agreement regarding the procession route, emphasizing the importance of maintaining public order and respecting agreements made with the administration.
The petitioners, social workers advocating for a public cause, argued that the traditional route for the Alam/Tazia procession had been blocked by the Railways due to safety concerns following an accident in 2022. They sought permission for an alternative route which, according to them, would facilitate the customary religious observance without significant delays.
However, the court noted that an agreement had been reached between the Muslim community and the district administration in July 2022, which outlined a customary route that did not include the new route proposed by the petitioners. The respondents, represented by Mr. Girijesh Kumar Tripathi, Additional Chief Standing Counsel, submitted that the new route was opposed by other religious communities and could potentially lead to law and order issues.
The judgment highlighted that while Article 25 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to practice one's religion, this right does not extend to choosing specific routes for religious processions, especially when such choices may disrupt public order or contravene existing agreements. The court emphasized that the administration's decision to deny the new route was based on a comprehensive assessment of potential social frictions and law and order challenges.
The petitioners' application was dismissed, with the court reiterating that the right to practice religion must be balanced with considerations of public safety and order. The decision underscores the judiciary's role in ensuring that religious freedoms are exercised within the framework of law and communal harmony.
Bottom line:-
Right to practice religion under Article 25 of the Constitution does not extend to choosing a specific route for religious processions, especially when it conflicts with law and order considerations or agreements between parties.
Statutory provision(s): Article 25 of the Constitution of India.
Sharif Ahmad v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2930243
