Back
1996 Supreme(AP) 285
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : M.H.S.ANSARI, P.S.MISHRA
Quraan Society rep.by its President, shah Mohd.Azizullakhan, Nizami Warisi - Appellant
Versus
The Union of India, rep.by its Cabinet secretary.New Delhi - Respondent
Decided On : 04-05-96
The court's decision highlights the importance of balancing the right to religious freedom with the need to preserve democracy. In cases where there is a conflict between religious duty and the exercise of franchise, the court will consider the interests of all parties involved and may not interfere with the decision of the Election Commission if it finds that the decision was made in good faith and without any intention to discriminate against a particular community or religious denomination.
Headnote:
ELECTION - SCHEDULE - CONFLICT WITH RELIGIOUS DUTY - MUSLIMS - HAJ PILGRIMAGE - COURT REFUSED TO INTERFERE WITH ELECTION SCHEDULE - NO FOUL PLAY FOUND IN THE DECISION OF THE ELECTION COMMISSION - COURT EXPRESSED THAT ELECTION COMMISSION SHOULD NOT IGNORE THE INTERESTS OF ANY SECTION OF THE PEOPLE OF INDIA IN DECIDING ABOUT THE ELECTIONS.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, a society formed for the advancement of the case of the Muslims in all respects, challenged the election schedule set by the Election Commission for the Lok Sabha and six State Assemblies, claiming that it conflicted with the holy month of Zilhijah, during which Muslims perform the Haj pilgrimage to Mecca. The petitioner argued that this would deprive a substantial number of potential voters belonging to the Muslim community of their right to franchise and vote.
Finding of the Court:
The court acknowledged the conflict between the performance of the religious duty of Haj and the exercise of franchise for Muslims who wished to participate in the pilgrimage during the holy month of Zilhijah. However, the court found no evidence of foul play or an intention to deny the Muslim community their right to franchise and vote.
Issues: 1. Whether the election schedule set by the Election Commission violated the religious freedom of Muslims who wished to perform the Haj pilgrimage during the holy month of Zilhijah? 2. Whether the court should interfere with the Election Commission's decision in light of the potential conflict between religious duty and the exercise of franchise?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court recognized the importance of religious freedom and the right to practice one's religion, including the performance of religious duties such as the Haj pilgrimage. 2. However, the court also emphasized the importance of democracy and the need to balance the interests of all communities and religious denominations. 3. The court found that the Election Commission had taken into account the interests of all parties involved, including the Muslim community, in setting the election schedule. 4. The court held that the slight infraction of the right of the Muslim community due to the election schedule was justified by the more pressing need to preserve democracy.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, refusing to interfere with the Election Commission's decision on the election schedule. The court emphasized the need for the Election Commission to consider the interests of all communities and religious denominations in making decisions related to elections.
( 1 ) THE Society purportedly formed for the purpose of advancement of the case of the Muslims in all respects has moved this Court under Article 226 of the constitution of India, seeking inter alia, a Writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, to restrain the respondents from holding the elections slated to be held on and from 27th April, 1996 for the Lok Sabha as well as six State assemblies in the country and for a direction that elections be held only after 20th May, 1996.
( 2 ) THE present Lok Sabha, it is stated in the affidavit on behalf of the petitioner, is to reach its end by 19th June, 1996. Elections are proposed to be held however from 27th April, 1996 onwards in four stages. It is alleged the 1st respondent-Union of India as well as the Prime Minister of India suggested holding the elections in the last week of May and first week of June, 1996. The 2nd and 3rd respondents however i. e. , the Election Commission of India and the Chief Election Commissioner rejected the representation of the 1st respondent and the Prime Minister as well as various other persons and decided to hold elections in the last week of April, 1996 and the first week of may, 1996.
( 3 ) IT is stated however that the proposed elections are falling in the month of zilhijah, which is a holy month for every Muslim and the period of the Haj pilgrimage to the holy Mecca, the place of birth of Prophet Mohammed and the khane-e-Kaba, the house of God located at Mecca in Saudi Arabia: Holy Quran enjoins every Mussulman to visit Mecca in the holy month of zilhijah and muslims all over the world take it as their religious duty to visit Mecca once in life time. The month of Zilhijah begins from 20th April and such Muslims who decide to visit Mecca would stay for a period of 10 to 15 days and the visit to the land of Khane-e-Kaba and other holy places in Saudi Arabia would take not less than two weeks time. Petitioner also states:-" As per the practice, every muslim has to perform certain Religious duties at Makka and thereafter, he shall visit the Madina, which is located in soudi Arabia and which is around 800 K. M. away from Makka. Madina is a place where the Prophet Mohammed stayed there for 10 long years and died. He was buried there, hence, it is a Holy Place for every Muslim. Every muslim who visits the Madina must offer prayers 40 times i. e. , 5 times a day for 8 days. The place known as Gubade Khazra is the Holyist place for all the muslims. This pilgrimage will take atleast one month to complete. Every year around 2 lakh people from this country will visit Makka and madina, in this Holy month. If the permission is given, more number of muslims will visit the Holy Place in this Holy month. In view of the nonavailability of the facilities at Makka for such a huge croud, the government of India restricts the number of persons, who can visit makka. "contending accordingly that there is a conflict between the performance of the religious duty and the exercise of franchise which every adult above 18 years of age for at least about 2 lakhs of Muslims who are permitted to visit Mecca in the holy month of Zilhijah, the petitioner states that the decision to hold elections in the last week of April and the first week of May, 1986 by the 2nd and the 3rd respondents has the effect of denying to a substantial number of potential voters belonging to the Muslim community the right of franchise and vote to elect their representatives as well as their right under Article 25 of the Constitution of India to profess, propagate and practise their religion and belief.
( 4 ) PART XV of the Constitution of India contains provisions as to elections to parliament and to the Legislature of every State and of elections to the Office of president and Vice President held under the Constitution and provides for elections to the House of the People and to the Legislative Assemblies of the states to be on the basis of adult suffrage. Article 326 therei
