SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Cal) 2707

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Tirthankar Ghosh, J
Sufism Madaria Organisation – Appellant
Versus
The State of West Bengal – Respondent
W.P.A. No. 14724 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Kalyan Banerjee, Sr. Adv., Mr. Soumya Basu Roy Chowdhury, Mr. Sarbananda Sanyal, Ms. Paulami Chakraborty, Mr. Samrat Chakraborty, Mr. Saikat Gayen
For the Respondent No. 9: Mr. Samim Ahammed, Mr. Imteaz Ahamed, Mr. Arka Maiti, Ms. Gulsunwara Pervin, Mr. Arka Ranjan Bhattacharya, Ms. Saloni Bhattacharya
For the State: Mr. Swapan Banerjee, Mr. Diptendu Narayan Banerjee

The court upheld the right to conduct religious processions while emphasizing the necessity of police oversight to ensure public safety.

Headnote:(A) Constitution - Rights to religious procession - The petitioners sought permission for a procession on the occasion of Muharram, which was previously denied due to jurisdictional issues. The State's conditions for conducting the procession included a participant cap and adherence to conduct standards to prevent violence. (Paras 1-11)

(B) Administrative Discretion - The police are empowered to manage and disperse gatherings as necessary for public order and safety. (Paras 10-11)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner organization aimed to conduct a religious procession but did not receive a response from authorities regarding their application, leading to concerns of being deprived of their rights.

Findings of Court:
The court directed the police to decide on a suitable ending point for the procession, enforcing certain conditions for its conduct to ensure public safety and order.

Issues: The main issue involved balancing the petitioners' rights to assemble and conduct their religious practices against public safety concerns.

Ratio Decidendi: The police must oversee public processions and can impose conditions to maintain order while respecting constitutional rights to assembly (Paras 8-11).

Result: The petition was disposed of with directions regarding conditions to be followed for the procession.

Mr. Soumya Basu Roy Chowdhury Mr. Sarbananda Sanyal Ms. Paulami Chakraborty Mr. Samrat Chakraborty Mr. Saikat Gayen For the Respondent No. 9 : Mr. Samim Ahammed Mr. Imteaz Ahamed Mr. Arka Maiti Ms. Gulsunwara Pervin Mr. Arka Ranjan Bhattacharya Ms. Saloni Bhattacharya For the State : Mr. Swapan Banerjee Mr. Diptendu Narayan Banerjee Heard On : 04.07.2025 Judgement On : 04.07.2025 Tirthankar Ghosh, J. :-

The petitioner no. 1 ‘Sufism Madaria Organisation’ and the petitioner no. 2 is the President of ‘Sufism Madaria Organisation’ who intends to take out a procession on the occasion of Muharram and to that effect they advanced their representation to the jurisdictional police authorities, but the same has not been responded till date. Petitioner is apprehensive that since the date fixed for Muharram is on 06.07.2025 they may be deprived of their rights to carry out their religious procession.

Attention of the Court has been drawn by the private respondent in respect of the earlier order being WPA 17311 of 2024 dated 11.07.2024 wherein Court rejected the prayers of the petitioner as it was claimed that they are an organization registered with 24 Parganas (South). The addresses which have been furnished before this Court by the Organisation is of Village and Post Office – Khajutty, Police Station – Bagnan, District - Howrah and it has been claimed by the organization and its President that no individual of 24 Parganas (South) would participate in the procession and it is only the people of Howrah who would be participating in the procession. Although in the representation a different route was proposed, but presently the petitioners have before the Court stated that they intend to proceed in the following route between 9.00 a.m. to 12.00 p.m. (the time period should be flexible and the Inspector-in-Charge, Bagnan Police Station will decide the said time within the aforesaid time limits) :-

“From Sufism Madaria Organisation (Aymma Manzil) – Ratanmore Dogora (through Bainan Road)- Surendranath Primary School (through District Council Road) – Manna Para – Badshahmore and return to Aymma Manzil.”

Resistance has been advanced both by the private respondents as well as the State so far as the end point is concerned relating to Sufism Madaria Organisation, Karbala. The police authorities before this Court have submitted that till now they have not granted permission to the private respondents and the same is awaited. So far as the end point is concerned, I find that the ‘Khajuti Amtala Karbala Sarif’ is the point of conflict between the two organizations.

Having considered the same, I direct the police authorities not to grant permission to any of the three proposed applicants along with the present applicant to culminate their procession at Karbala. It would be for the convenience of all the organizations and their processions to conclude their procession at a Darga which would be decided by the police authorities.

Learned advocate for the State has forwarded the following terms and conditions which are as follows :-

(a) At any point of time, the total number of participants shall not exceed a number of about 750 (approximately). In order to ensure that the number of participants is limited to 750, the petitioners shall make necessary announcements and/or issue leaflets, if required;

(b) The organizers shall nominate 5 persons from amongst themselves who shall be held responsible for conducting the procession;

(c) The participants shall not carry or brandish any arms or weapons;

(d) The participants and the organizers shall not use any foul language or incite violence;

(e) The participants shall not carry in the procession any stick, lathi, swords, knives, sticks or any kind of tool or weapon;

(f) The participants shall also abide by the relevant pollution norms including the sound norms. Only normal sound system should be used. No disc jockey shall be allowed in the said procession;

(g) The participants in the procession shall not halt or pause at

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top