New Delhi: The Allahabad High Court has ruled that the right to conduct prayers or religious gatherings within private premises is protected under Article 25 of the Constitution, stressing that such activities cannot be restricted based on faith or denomination. The observation came in an order dated March 16 while the court was hearing a petition concerning limits imposed on offering namaz during Ramzan at a site in Sambhal. The bench of Justices Atul Sreedharan and Siddharth Nandan said any objections by individuals or groups to prayers on private property must be addressed by the state, which is also obligated to ensure protection for both the place of worship and the worshippers.
The court reiterated that “there can be no impediment or embargo” on religious functions conducted within private premises, regardless of the religion of the individual. It clarified that Article 25 guarantees every person the equal right to profess, practice and propagate their faith, subject only to public order, morality and health. At the same time, it warned that actions or speech that could disturb public order or incite tensions between religious groups fall outside constitutional protection and may invite criminal action.
The case arose from a petition filed by Sambhal resident Munazir Khan, who alleged that authorities had restricted the number of worshippers to 20 during Ramzan at a premises he described as a mosque. The state defended the restriction by citing concerns over law and order. However, the court rejected this reasoning, stating earlier that it is the duty of the administration to uphold the rule of law in all circumstances. It had also remarked that officials such as the district magistrate and superintendent of police should consider resignation or transfer if they felt unable to manage the situation without imposing such limits.
After examining photographs submitted as part of a supplementary affidavit, the bench noted that the structure in question was not a mosque at present. Nevertheless, it acknowledged that namaz had been offered there previously and held that there should be no obstruction to continuing prayers at the site.
The court also referred to its earlier ruling in the Maranatha Full Gospel Ministries case, reaffirming that no prior permission from authorities is required to hold prayer meetings on private premises. It directed the state to remain mindful of this position.
Addressing broader constitutional principles, the bench stated that its interpretation of Article 25 should not be seen as granting any special status to followers of Islam. Instead, it underlined that the provision is neutral and applies equally to all religions, as well as to individuals who do not subscribe to any faith. The judges noted that the freedom of conscience protected under Article 25 extends even to atheists, allowing them to express their beliefs through reason and logic. Highlighting India’s diversity, the court observed that the country’s strength lies in the coexistence of multiple religions, cultures and languages among its 1.4 billion people. It pointed out that different faiths follow distinct traditions of congregation, citing examples such as Friday prayers in Islam, Sunday mass in Christianity and Sabbath observance in Judaism, while noting that some Eastern religions do not have fixed days for communal worship.
The plea was ultimately disposed of with directions to the state to ensure compliance with constitutional protections and previous judicial rulings concerning religious gatherings on private property.