The right to practice religion subject to reasonable restrictions, acknowledgment of State's concerns, imposition of specific conditions for peaceful conduct.

JUDGMENT :

Jay Sengupta, J.

This is an application praying for direction upon the respondents to allow Shri Ram Navami Procession in its traditional route in Howrah as prayed for by the petitioner.

2. Report filed on behalf of the State is taken on record.

3. A copy of the same is handed over to the learned counsel for the petitioners.

4. Learned senior counsel representing the petitioners submits as follows. The petitioners want to organise Ram Navami Shobhayatra Rally, where the followers of Lord Rama will participate in the religious procession. It will be conducted on 21.04.2024 between 3pm and 6pm. Similar rally has been conducted by the petitioners for the past several years. The petitioners would limit the number of participants at a time to 200. The march will begin from B. E. College Gate No.1 and end at Ramkrishnapur Ganga Ghat. It will pass through a portion of G.T. Road. After an application to this effect was made to the police authorities, the police suggested an alternative route citing law and order reason and asking the petitioners to follow a route after Kazipara through the Foreshore Road and then end their march at Ramkrishnapur Ghat. This will render the procession infructuous because Foreshore Road mainly has godowns and ware houses in its way. This is hardly a residential area where people staying could come out, as on the G.T.Road, to garland Lord Rama. It is true that last year certain untoward incidents had taken place being instigated by members of another community. There are cases pending over the same. However, that is no reason for the petitioners not to have such a procession through the G.T. Road. Incidentally, members of the other community regularly have their religious meetings on the said road. In fact, an organisation owing allegiance to the ruling political dispensation also intends to hold a similar rally on Ram Navami through the same route on the same day. The petitioners undertake not to permit any kind of incitement to violence, not to carry arms and not to use any abusive language.

5. Learned senior counsel representing the State relies on the report and submits as follows. First, at present, the Foreshore Road also houses residential buildings and complexes. The alternative route would have been easier to manage. No permission has been granted to the other organisation, which the petitioners have referred to as owing allegiance to the ruling political dispensation, to hold any such procession or rally on the date and at the same route. Last year, when a similar procession was taken out, they were having 10,000 to 15,000 participants. There were several offences committed on that day. Criminal cases had to be started, inter alia, under Sections 307, 325, 427 and 436 of the Penal Code and under other provisions of law. There are photographs of some of the participants belonging to the petitioners’ side vandalising the area on that day last year. Subsequently, a Division Bench of this Court transferred all these investigations to the NIA. The Division Bench, in fact, granted liberty to the State to alter the route to be taken by the participants, if necessary. The State has, in fact, allowed several other rallies in the Howrah District itself on the occasion of Ram Navami. This year, due to the ensuing elections the State is having dearth of forces even to manage a contingent of 200 participants.

6. Learned Additional Solicitor General representing the Union of India submits that in the event the State makes a request to any Central Paramilitary Force to assist and maintain peace on the occasion of such rally, the Union of India shall arrange for necessary forces.

7. The concern of the State is justified that in the preceding year certain untoward incidents had taken place.

8. Had it been the case that the petitioners wanted 10,000 to 15,000 participants of their organisation to pass through the area, a portion of which has been described as sensitive by the State, this Court could hav