Back
ANANDA SEN
Hanumant Katha Aayojan Samiti – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard, the learned counsel for the parties.
2. Petitioner by filing this writ petition initially had prayed for a direction upon the respondent-authorities to take appropriate action pursuant to their application, seeking consent and permission, for organizing a “Hanumant Katha” from 10.02.2024 to 15.02.2024 in Medininagar, District- Palamau.
3. It is their case that as the respondents had not taken any steps and were sitting tight over the application they were forced to approach this Court for the necessary direction as originally prayed for.
4. During the pendency of the writ petition a supplementary counter affidavit was filed. In the said counter affidavit, the respondents-State has produced an order being Memo No.24 dated 10.01.2024, by which the permission sought for by the petitioner for organizing that “Hanumant Katha”, was rejected. The petitioner thus challenged the said order by filing an amendment application. The amendment application was allowed and amended writ petition is also filed.
5. The State has also file a second supplementary counter affidavit. Thus this matter has been listed today for final disposal of the writ application.
6. Learned counsel for the
The State's refusal to permit a peaceful assembly must align with Article 19(3) of the Constitution; mere law and order concerns are insufficient grounds for restriction.
Point of law : Right need to be balanced with other contrasting fundamental rights and is subject to reasonable restrictions indicated in Articles 19(2) and (3). Therefore, the mere fact that batch o....
The impugned order was passed without jurisdiction and in violation of the principles of natural justice, and it infringed upon the Petitioner's fundamental rights under Article 19(1), Articles 25 an....
The right to assemble peacefully and protest is a fundamental right guaranteed under Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b), and 19(1)(d) of the Constitution of India. The police cannot reject permission for a ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the recognition of the fundamental right to peaceful assembly and protest, subject to reasonable restrictions, and the duty of the State to respect....
The court affirmed that access to public temples cannot be restricted based on caste or community, emphasizing the fundamental right to worship under Article 25 of the Constitution.
The right to religious freedom is subject to reasonable restrictions for maintaining public order, and state guidelines regulating places of worship have legal authority.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
