Allahbad High Court
A.BANERJI
Sarwar Husain - Appellant
Versus
Additional Civil Judge (J.S.C.S.), Moradabad - Respondent
Decided On : 07/15/1982
MUHAMMADAN LAW - PUBLIC MOSQUE - RIGHT TO OFFER NAMAZ - FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT - MANAGEMENT OF RELIGIOUS AFFAIRS - INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLES 25 AND 26 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.
Fact of the Case:
A dispute arose between two sects of Muslims regarding the right to offer Namaz in a public mosque led by an Imam of their choice. The plaintiffs, belonging to the Deobandi school of thought, claimed that they had a right to be led in their prayer by an Imam of their choice, while the defendants, belonging to the Barelvi school of thought, contested this claim.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that there is no absolute right in any party to occupy the mosque for the purpose of offering Namaz only when led by an Imam of their choice. The fundamental right of a Muslim in a mosque is to offer his prayers, and the particular rite followed and how it is done are matters of practice, not fundamental rights.
Issues: 1. Whether a Muslim has an absolute right to demand that the Imam of his sect would lead him to prayers and restrain others from preventing him from offering his prayers as desired by him? 2. Whether there is any fundamental right in the matter of offering Namaz in a particular way?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. A Muslim has a fundamental right to offer his Namaz in a public mosque, regardless of his sect or denomination. 2. There is no fundamental right to offer Namaz only when led by an Imam of one's choice. 3. The management of religious affairs, including the right to appoint an Imam, is subject to public order, morality, and health.
Final Decision: The court set aside the order of the lower court granting an injunction restraining the defendants from having their own Imam to lead them in their prayers in the mosque concerned.
2. It is well settled and admits of no doubt whatsoever that a Muslim of whatever sect and denomination he may be has a right to offer his Namaz in a masque dedicated to God. He cannot be restrained from doing so. A Muhammedan has an absolute right of entry into any Public masque for the purpose of offering his Namaz. It does not matter at all as to who manages the mosque, nor the sect to which the founder of the masque belonged; it also does not matter as to which particular sect or school of thought, the person seeking entrance, for offering Namaz, belongs. Thus so far there is no dispute at all.
3. Article 25 of the Constitution of India guarantees all citizens the right to freely Practise his religion.
4. Article 26 Of the Constitution guarantees the freedom to manage religious affairs although it is subject to Public order, morality and health. "Every religious denomination or section thereof shall have a right (a) to establish and maintain institutions of religious and charitable purposes and (b) manage its own affairs in the matter of religion, (c) to own and acquire movable and immovable property, and (d) to administer such property in accordance With law". This Article entitles every religious denomination to establish or maintain an institution for religious Purposes. Therefore, it is open to any sect or School of thought among the Muhomedans to establish and maintain an institution for religious purpose. This entitles a person to establish a mosque and dedicate it to Allah Talah and then make necessary arrangement for its maintenance for religious purposes. Such person or persons have the right to manage their affairs in the matter of religion and also to own and acquire and administer property dedicated to the mosque.
5. A question arises as to the meaning of the words "manage its own affairs in matters of religion". What is the scope of this provision which is enshrined in Article 26 (b) ?. Does it entitle the founder of the public masque or any sect in particular, to lay down its own Rules regarding the offering of Namaz or to offer Namaz led by a particular Pesh Imam.
6. In the celebrated book on "Principles of Mahomedan Law" by Mulla, 16th edition edited by Honble M. Hidayatullah, Para. 218 defers to public mosques as follows :
"Public masque : - Every Mahomedan is entitled to enter a masque dedicated to God, whatever may be the sect or school to which he belongs, and to perform his devotions according to the ritual of his own sect or school. But it is not certain whether a masque appropriated exclusively by the founder to any Particular sect or school can be used by the followers of any sect or school.
The right to offer prayers in a masque is a legal right, for the disturbance of which a Muslim is entitled to seek relief in a Court of law."
7. Reference is made to the decision in the case of Alaullah v. Azimullab (1890) ILB 12 All 494 (FBI wherein it was held that a mosque dedicated to God is for the use of all Mahomedans and cannot lawfully be appropriated for the use of any Particular sect. The view was followed by the High Court of Lahore in the case of Maula Baksh v. Amir-ud-Din (1920) ILR 1 Lah 317: (AIR 1920 Lah 384). The Lahore High Court further held that there is no such thing as a Shia mosque or a Sunni masque; See Mt. Iqbal Begum v. Mt. Syed Begum (AIR 1933 Lah 80).
8. In the case of Haji Mohd. Sayeed v. Abdul Gafoor (AIR 1955 All 688) a question came up before this Court in regard to the grant of injuction to restrain the members of one sect of Mohammedans from interf
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.