The Allahabad High Court recently set aside an order issued by the Government of Uttar Pradesh that limited the number of people allowed to offer prayers at a mosque in Sambhal district on law and order grounds, according to ANI.
It observed that the Superintendent of Police and the District Collector should either step down or seek a transfer if they consider themselves incapable of maintaining the rule of law.
What did the court say?
“It is the duty of the State to ensure that the rule of law prevails under every circumstance. If the local authorities i.e. Superintendent of Police and Collector feel that the law and order situation could arise because of which they want to limit the number of worshipers within the premises, they should either resign from their post or seek transfer outside Sambhal,” the court said after hearing counsels for the parties.
A division bench of Justices Atul Sreedharan and Siddharth Nandan noted that it is the responsibility of the State to ensure that members of every community are able to offer prayers peacefully at their designated places of worship. The bench further indicated that if the site in question is a private property, as held earlier by the court, worship can be conducted there without requiring prior permission from the State.
The court was hearing a petition filed by Munazir Khan from Sambhal, who alleged that he was stopped from offering prayers during Ramzan at Gata No. 291, where he claimed a mosque is located.
“This court has already settled that it is only where prayers or religious functions have to be held on public land or spill over the public property that the involvement of the state is essential and permission must be sought,” the court mentioned in its order dated February 27.
The state government has contested the petitioner’s claim over Gata No. 291, stating that revenue records show the land registered in the names of Mohan Singh and Bhooraj Singh, both sons of Sukhi Singh.
Authorities had granted permission for only 20 people to offer namaz at the site. However, the petitioner argued that a much larger gathering is expected for prayers since it is the month of Ramzan.
Representing the state, counsel submitted that the restriction on the number of worshipers was imposed due to apprehensions regarding the law and order situation.
The court has scheduled the matter for next hearing on March 16.
