The Allahabad High Court has disposed of a writ petition concerning the offering of Namaz at a private property in Bareilly, following a formal undertaking by the petitioner that he would not assemble large groups for prayers.
In an order dated March 25, a division bench comprising Justice Saral Srivastava and Justice Garima Prashad directed state authorities to immediately withdraw a police challan issued against the petitioner, Tariq Khan, and others. The court also discharged contempt notices previously issued to the District Magistrate and the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) of Bareilly.
The case originated from a petition filed by Tariq Khan, who alleged that he was being prevented from offering Namaz at a property owned by his relative, Haseen Khan. The core legal dispute centered on whether religious offerings at a private residence constituted a threat to “peace and tranquility” if they involved significant gatherings. The proceedings concluded after the petitioner submitted that he would not collect a large number of people at the site, leading the court to dispose of the matter while granting the State liberty to act if the undertaking is breached.
The controversy escalated on January 16, 2026, when Bareilly authorities issued a police challan against Tariq Khan and several others while they were offering prayers at Haseen Khan’s property. Subsequently, on March 11, the High Court had directed the provision of security to Haseen Khan after he expressed concerns regarding the protection of his family and property.
However, during the latest hearing, the legal narrative shifted as the State presented evidence of large-scale gatherings at the residence.
Additional Advocate General (AAG) Anoop Trivedi, appearing for the State, argued that the protection granted to Haseen Khan was being “misused.” To substantiate this, the State placed photographs on record via personal affidavits from the District Magistrate and SSP.
The AAG submitted that:
- Between 52 to 62 persons were offering Namaz at the property on a daily basis.
- Such continued practice was “detrimental to the peace and tranquility of the area.”
- State authorities were obligated to intervene to prevent any potential disturbance of law and order.
In response, the counsel for the petitioner provided a formal undertaking to the court, stating that Tariq Khan “will not gather a large number of persons for offering Namaz over the property.” The counsel also informed the bench that Haseen Khan no longer required the security previously mandated by the court.
The division bench took the petitioner’s undertaking on record and emphasized the importance of maintaining local harmony.
The Court observed:
“We hope and trust that the petitioner shall abide by the undertaking given by him. In case the petitioner violates the aforesaid undertaking and collects [people] in large numbers to offer Namaz at the property and if there is a threat to peace and tranquility in the area, the respondent authorities are at liberty to act in accordance with law.”
The Court issued the following directions:
- Withdrawal of Challan: The state authorities must immediately withdraw the police challan dated January 16, 2026.
- Security Removal: The security provided to Haseen Khan under the March 11 direction is to be withdrawn immediately.
- Contempt Discharge: The contempt notices against the Bareilly DM and SSP were discharged following their appearance and the filing of their personal affidavits.
With these observations and directions, the High Court officially disposed of the writ petition.
