Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community vs State of Maharashtra

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(SC) 116

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, SANJIV KHANNA, ABHAY S. OKA, VIKRAM NATH, J. K. MAHESHWARI
Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Siddharth Bhatnagar, Sr. Adv. Ms. Manik Karanjawala, Adv. Ms. Nandini Gore, Adv. Mr. Jatin Mongia, Adv. Ms. Tahira Karanjawala, Adv. Ms. Niharika Karanjawala, Adv. Mr. Arjun Sharma, Adv. Ms. Neha Khandelwal, Adv. Mr. Shreyas Maheshwari, Adv. Mr. Karanveer Singh Anand, Adv. Mr. Ritwik Mohapatra, Adv. Mr. Aditya Sidhra, Adv. Ms. Pracheta Kar, Adv. Mr. Nadeem Afroz, Adv. M/S. Karanjawala & Co., AOR Mrs. Manik Karanjawala, AOR Mr. Sanklap Goswami, Adv. Mr. Azhar Alam, Adv. Ms. B. Vijayalakshmi Menon, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. F.S. Nariman, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sameer Parekh, Adv. Mr. Subhas Sharma, Adv. Mr. Abheezar Faizullabhoy, Adv. Mr. D.P. Mohanty, Adv. Mr. E.R. Kumar, Adv. Mr. Murtaza Kachwaha, Adv. Ms. Sonal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Prateek Khandelwal, Adv. M/S. Parekh & Co., AOR Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv. Mr. Abhikalp Pratap Singh, Adv. Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Ms. Kirti Dadheech, Adv. Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Adv. M/S. S. Narain & Co., AOR Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, AOR Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

ABHAY S. OKA, J.

FACTUAL ASPECTS

1. In Writ Petition (C) No.740 of 1986, the preliminary issue is whether the view taken by a Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of Sardar Syedna Taher Saifuddin Saheb v. State of Bombay, (1962) Suppl. (2) SCR 496 : AIR 1962 SC 853 , requires reconsideration.

2. In the case of Sardar Syedna (supra), the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India was invoked for challenging the constitutional validity of the Bombay Protection of Ex-communication Act, 1949 (for short, ‘the Ex-communication Act’). Section 3 of the Ex-communication Act provided that notwithstanding anything contained in any law, custom or usage for the time being in force to the contrary, no Ex-communication of a member of any community shall be valid and shall be of any effect. Under the Ex-communication Act, the term ‘community’ was defined to mean a group, the members of which are connected together by reason of the fact that by birth, conversion or the performance of any religious rite, they belong to the same religion or religious creed and includes caste or sub-caste. Under clause (b) of Section 2 of the Ex-communication Act, ‘Ex-commu

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2023 Supreme(SC) 116

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, SANJIV KHANNA, ABHAY S. OKA, VIKRAM NATH, J. K. MAHESHWARICentral Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community – AppellantVersusState of Maharashtra – Respondent

Cases Referred (12)

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, SANJIV KHANNA, ABHAY S. OKA, VIKRAM NATH, J. K. MAHESHWARI
Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent