The Madhya Pradesh High Court allowed a litigant to conduct a New Year programme of the Christian community and observed that merely on the basis of certain objections raised by the member of one community, the right of the petitioner to assemble and pray as per his religion as guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution, cannot be taken away.

The Writ Petition before the High Court was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a direction to be given to the District administration to restate the permission to conduct a New Year programme of the Christian community. The petitioner also sought setting aside the impugned order passed by the sub-divisional magistrate.

The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar asserted, “Thus, the petitioner has also been deprived of his valuable right to be heard before passing of an adverse order against him.”

Advocate Rajesh Joshi represented the petitioner while Government Advocate Mayank Mishra represented the respondents/State.

The petitioner belonging to the Christian community, had applied to the S.D.M for conducting a New Year programme of the Christian community. It was also mentioned in the aforesaid application that the programme shall be conducted strictly in accordance with the guidelines issued. The aforesaid application was allowed by the S.D.M, under certain conditions. However, the petitioner was served yet another order informing that on account of certain objections raised by Vishva Hindu Parishad, it appeared that the programme to be conducted by the petitioner, would cause disturbance and communal harmony. Hence, the permission earlier granted to the petitioner was rejected.

It was the case of the petitioner that before passing the aforesaid order, the petitioner was never informed, and was never given any opportunity of hearing. It was also submitted that even otherwise the aforesaid programme is conducted every year.

On a perusal of the record, the Bench noted that the petitioner has been conducting such programme since last more than a couple of years and the same was also affirmed by the documents on record. “...in such circumstances, merely on the basis of certain objections raised by the member of one community, the right of the petitioner to assemble and pray as per his religion as guaranteed under Art.25 of the Constitution, cannot be taken away”, the Bench said.

The Bench further noticed that the S.D.M. had rejected the permission only on the asking of member of another community, without even affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. “Thus, the petitioner has also been deprived of his valuable right to be heard before passing of an adverse order against him”, it added.

Finding no substance in the order of rejection of permission , the Bench quashed the same and directed that the petitioner shall be free to hold the function as allowed earlier by the S.D.M.

“The Collector, Jhabua is also directed to ensure that no disruption takes place, while the aforesaid programme/function is convened”, it concluded.

Cause Title: Vijay Katara v. Principal Secretary and Others (Neutral Citation: 2025:MPHC-IND)

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocate Rajesh Joshi

Respondent: Government Advocate Mayank Mishra

Click here to read/download Order