New Delhi: Last week, a series of announcements triggered confusion and debate in the national capital over whether meat shops would be shut along the Kanwar Yatra route. A week later, no official order has been made public, leaving traders, residents, and observers wondering if this policy was real or just symbolic posturing. With the yatra ongoing, questions remain about governance, legal overreach and the use of religious sentiment in civic regulation. However, meat traders are largely cooperating with what appears to be an unofficial expectation during the yatra, even though there is no formal order or recorded case of enforcement.
On July 9, BJP MLA Tarvinder Singh Marwah wrote to Union Home Minister Amit Shah requesting a temporary ban on liquor and meat shops during the yatra. A day later, Delhi’s Culture and Tourism Minister Kapil Mishra announced that all meat shops along the Kanwar route would indeed be shut during the holy month of Sawan, calling many of them “illegal.” But just as quickly, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) clarified there was no legal provision under the DMC Act, 1957, to enforce such a blanket ban. Arshad Habib Qureshi, president of the Delhi Meat Merchants Association, said there has been no official communication from the MCD ordering meat shops to shut during the Kanwar Yatra.
“MCD is the only authority regarding meat licences, and there is no instruction to close meat shops during the Yatra,” Qureshi said. He also stated that no meat shopkeeper has filed a complaint of being forced to shut down during this period. “But if anyone is forcing shopkeepers to close, it is not legally correct. It is our fundamental right to earn our livelihood lawfully,” he said.
Despite the lack of orders, Qureshi said the association has instructed all members to put up curtains or cover displays out of respect for Kanwar pilgrims. As saffron-clad devotees walk through the capital’s streets in large numbers, meat shopkeepers appear to be navigating an unspoken social contract — one shaped more by political messaging and religious sentiment than by official directives. Whether driven by caution, courtesy, or quiet pressure, their compliance reflects a complex negotiation between livelihood and religious sensitivities in a city where policy often plays out in the grey zones between law and sentiment.