It is really good to learn that the Karnataka High Court in a very remarkable, refreshing, robust, recent and rational judgment titled Chandrashekhar R vs The State of Karnataka in Writ Petition No. 10473 of 2022 (GM-RES-PIL) pronounced as recently as on August 22, 2022 while observing that Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution embodies the principle of religious tolerance which is a characteristic of Indian civilization disposed of a public interest litigation alleging that the contents of Azan (call for prayers in Islam) hurt the sentiments of believers of other faiths by rejecting such allegations. It must be noted that the Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice S Vishwajith Shetty said quite clearly that:
Contention that the contents of Azan violate the fundamental right guaranteed to the petitioner as well as persons of other faith cannot be accepted. It must be mentioned here that Advocate Manjunath S Halawar appearing for the petitioner Chandrashekar R submitted that though Azan is an ‘essential religious practice’ of Muslims, however, the words Allahu Akbar used in Azan (translated as Allah is the greatest) affect the religious beliefs of others.
Needless to say, it is totally incomprehensible that as long as any individual is not forced to utter Allahu Akbar at gun point, how does it affects in anyway the religious beliefs of others? Why do some of us have such a narrow mentality? We must be more liberal and tolerant in our approach. This is exactly what the Karnataka High Court too has sought to demonstrate through this learned judgment also!
Personally speaking, I am a Hindu who firmly believes in Lord Shiv as the supreme power and have myself many times lived near mosques being from an Army background and really enjoy hearing Azan. To me, it signifies that we must get up as the morning time has begun and do some exercise or walk in balcony or in the road. In my life never have I ever considered it as interfering in my personal belief!
More intriguingly, I heard that even famous singer Sonu Nigam once complained of being disturbed in morning hours when he gets time to sleep by Azan. I really just can’t digest this point of view. It is said for a very short time as we all know and it only signifies beginning of morning early hours and that’s all! When I have full faith in my Lord Shiv and my Muslim brother has full faith in Allah and if he says Allahu Akbar then why should I consider it as a intervention in anyway in my personal religious beliefs as long as I am not forced to chant it? Whether it is said five times as it is, it just does not bother me at all and even if my Muslim brothers utter it 10 times then also it will not bother as it is a very small issue which I must be generous enough to concede that it is an integral part of their religion and why should I consider it as an invasion on my religion or my God?
It must be mentioned here that it is pointed out at the start of this notable judgment that:
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ or order, directing the respondent No.1 to 4 to stop the mosques or masjids in the state of Karnataka for using the objectionable words through loudspeakers while calling azan or adhan prayer 5 times in a day throughout the 365 days in a year and etc.
At the outset, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by Acting Chief Justice – Hon’ble Mr Alok Aradhe and Hon’ble Mr Justice S Vishwajith Shetty sets the pitch in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that:
Mr. Manjunath S. Halawar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Mahendra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents. The petitioner, who claims to be a resident of Bengaluru, has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs:
(i) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other Writ or Order, Directing the Respondent No.1 to 4 to stop the mosques or masjids in the State of Karnataka for using the objectionable words through loudspeakers while calling Azan or Adhan prayer 5 times in a day throughout the 365 days in a year.
(ii) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other writ directing to take step in order to seizure and confiscation of loudspeakers, amplifiers and such other equipment’s installed in mosques/ masjids for using the objectionable words while calling Azan or Adhan prayer in the State of Karnataka.
Simply put, the Bench then states in para 2 that:
The facts leading to filing of this petition, briefly stated are that Azan or Adhan prayers are being offered through loudspeakers and public address systems five times a day between 6.00 a.m to 10.00 p.m throughout the year from the mosques or masjids in the State of Karnataka.
As we see, the Bench then discloses in para 3 that:
The grievance of the petitioner as averred in the writ petition is that calling of Azan or Adhan, though is an essential religious practice of muslims, however, the contents of the Azan or Adhan are hurting the believers of other religious faiths.
Simply stated, the Bench then mentions in para 4 that:
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the contents of the Azan or Adhan hurts the sentiments of believers of other faiths and, therefore, a writ of mandamus be issued to respondent Nos.1 to 4 to stop the mosques/masjids in the State of Karnataka from using the contents through the loudspeakers or public address systems while calling Azan or Adhan prayers five times a day.
Needless to state, the Bench then mentions in para 5 that:
We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
To put things in perspective, the Bench then makes it clear in para 6 that, Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India embodies the principle of religious toleration which is a characteristic of Indian Civilization. Article 25(1) of the Constitution of India confers a fundamental right on all persons to freely profess, practice and propagate their own religion. However, the aforesaid right is not an absolute right, but is subject to restrictions on the grounds of public order, morality and health, as well as subject to other provisions in Part III of the Constitution of India.
Most forthrightly, most commendably and also most significantly, the Bench then minces just no words to most remarkably hold in para 7 that:
Undoubtedly, the petitioner as well as the believers of other faiths have the right to practice their religion. Azan or Adhan is a call to offer prayers. However, the contention that the contents of Azan or Adhan violate the fundamental right guaranteed to the petitioner as well as the persons of other faith cannot be accepted. It is also pertinent to note that it is not the case of the petitioner himself that his fundamental right guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution of India is being infringed in any manner by calling of Azan or Adhan through loudspeakers or public address systems.
While adding a rider to what is stated hereinabove, the Bench then deems it apposite to state in para 8 that:
However, before parting with the case, it is worth mentioning that the aforesaid right to practice religion is not an absolute right but, is subject to restrictions on the grounds of public order, morality and health, as well as other rights guaranteed in Part III of the Constitution.
Be it noted, the Bench then specifies in para 9 that:
The use of loudspeakers, public address systems and sound producing instruments is governed by the Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000 read with Section 37 of the Karnataka Police Act, 1963.
It is worth noting that the Bench then directs in para 10 that:
Respondent Nos.1 to 4 are, therefore, directed to ensure that the loudspeakers, public address systems, sound producing instruments and other musical instruments shall not be permitted to be used above permissible decibel during night from 10.00 p.m to 6.00 a.m.
Finally, the Bench then concludes by holding in para 11 that:
A Division Bench of this Court, by an order dated 17.06.2022 passed in Writ Petition No.4574/2021 has directed respondent Nos.1 to 4 herein to carry out a drive to prevent the misuse of loudspeakers and public address systems. The respondent Nos.1 to 4 shall follow the directions issued by this Court by an order dated 17.06.2022 passed in Writ Petition No.4574/2021 and shall file a compliance report before this Court within a period of eight weeks. With the aforesaid directions, the petition is disposed of.
In conclusion, we thus see that the Division Bench of Karnataka High Court has made it indubitably clear that contents of Azan don’t violate rights of other faiths under Article 25 and Article 26 of the Constitution. But it has also in the same vein directed in para 10 that in night time the sound must be within the permissible limits as stated above. It merits no reiteration that the same must be complied with accordingly so that others don’t get disturbed even though I personally never feels disturbed by it rather always enjoy listening it the most in the morning time especially. Of course, it is a no-brainer and incumbent that we all must definitely be more tolerant and broad minded in our overall approach so that our nation becomes most peaceful, prosperous, progressive and powerful!
Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh
Contents Of Azan Don't Violate Rights Of Other Faiths Under Article 25/26 Constitution: Karnataka High Court
Posted in:
General Practice
Fri, Aug 26, 22, 19:59, 2 Years ago
comments: 0 - hits: 4770
Chandrashekhar R vs Karnataka that Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution embodies the principle of religious tolerance which is a characteristic of Indian civilization disposed of a public interest litigation alleging that the contents of Azan
- Register your Copyright Online: We offer copyright registration right from your desktop Call us at Ph no: 9891244487
- File Mutual Consent Divorce: Right Away Call us at Ph no: 9650499965
- Online legal Advice: Receive professional Legal Solution within 48hrs
- File caveat in Supreme Court
Comments
There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.