~c^^^— i^l^ / E t. IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) W.P.fC) No..^.3;"^../2010 PETITIONERS: ^ 1. Nizam Mohammed Gauri, Aged about 62 Years S/o late Shri Bashir Mohammed Gauri, R/o-Rajkishore Nagar, Bilaspur (C.G.). o..<..<<^\ ^ s •f'^-/ ^/ \^'%\0" y^>/ ^-^^" -^y <^ ^•"sy ^p/ ^- RESPONDENTS: VERSUS / 2. Abdul Gaffar Gauri, Aged about 55 Years S/o Late Shri Abdul Sattar Gauri, R/o Handi ChowkThana Road, Raigarh (C.G.). / 3. Mohammed Iqbal Gauri, Aged about 5,0 Years S/o Late Shri Nazir Mohammed Gauri, '• i R/o Station Road Gram and Post Bilha, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 1. Secretary (Home) State of Chhattisgarh D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya Raipur (C.G.) /'2. Director General of Police State of Chhattisgarh Police Head Quarter, Raipur (C.G.) /3. Superintendent of Police Bilaspur (C.G.) /4. Superintendent of Police Raigarh (C.G.) 5. Superintendent of Police Durg'rC.G.) ,r ^-: ^ / 6. Abdul Jabbar Changal, Aged about 70 Years S/o Late Shri Hussain Changal, Member, C.G. State Wakf Board, R/o- C/o Alishan Boot House, Jairam Talkies Road, Bastal, Raipur (C.G.). I, . i h. Shamshuddin Bhindsara, Aged about 69 Years S/o Late Shri G Bhinsara, R/o-C/o- Oil Merchant, Jairam Takjes Road, Bastal, Raipur (C.G.). ^8. Mohd. Mustaak Khokhar, Aged about 58 Years S/o Late Shri Alanoor Khokhar, R/o Lakhenagar Chowk, . Panitanki Road, Idgah Bhata,Raipur (C.G.) ^9. Mohd. Ishaq Chouhan, Aged about 57 Years S/o Late Mohammed Ashraf Chouhan, R/o Rajasthan Rui Bhandar, Gole Bazar, Bilaspur (C.G.) ^IO. Mohd. Ramzan Gauri, Aged about 61 Years S/o Mohd. Ismial Gauri, R/o-C/o Gauri Atta Chakki, Taiba Chowk, Talapara, Bitaspur (C.G.) /II. Mohd. Salim Chouhan Aged about 60 Years S/o Mohd. Ibrahim Chouhan, R/o- Kelabadi Durg (C.G.). PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRITS OF MAN DAMUS AND CERTIORARI AND FOR OTHER SUITABLE WRITS AND DIRECTIONS: ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGAjRJH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition fC) No. 5279 of2010 PETITIONERS RESPONDENTS Nizam Mohammed Gauri & Others. VERSUS Secretary (Home) State of Chhattisgarh & Others. PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Asnihotri, J. Present: Shri Mateen Siddique, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri N.N.Roy, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No. 1 to5. O RD E R (Passed on 30ln day ofSeptember, 2010) Heard. 1. By this petition, the petitioners seek, a direction to the State/respondent No. 1 to 5 to take appropriate action against "53 Teli Gooat Jamaf", run by the private respondent No. 6 to 11. 2. According to leamed counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners belong to "Sunni" sect ofMohammedans. The respondent No. 6 to 11 claim to be well-wishers of Sunni community and have formed a society named as "53 Teli Gooat Jamat". They are trying to create chaos in Sunni community by forcing other members of the community to follow their ideas and belief. They have issued various illegal circulars/guidelines etc., one ofsuch circulars is circular dated 24.02.2008. They have issued seven point guidelines stating therein that the members bfsunni 1\ ^i 'WM^' community should be boycotted who are Guastake Rasul (not following Prophet Mohammad), and not to maintain any relations with them. In one ofthe circulars, it was obser^ed that the Muslim, who are Devbandi, Wahabi, Tabliki Jamat, Jamate Islami, may be condemned. 3. There is also an allegation that the respondent No. 6 to 11 are not permitting the petitioners to perform 'Namaz' in their religious places. The petitioners submit that the segregation of the petitioners on the basis of non-compliance ofthe dictat of 53, Teli Gooat Jamat, amounts to violation of Article 21, 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India. In support of their contention, the petitioners rely on the decisions ofthe Supreme Court in Saifuddin Saheb v. State ofBombay1 and Dr. M.Ismail Faruqui & Others . 4. It appears that there is dispute between the petitioners and the private respondent No. 6 to 11, who have allegedly formed a society called "53 Teli Gooat Jamat". This appears to be a religious dispute amongst the followers of the Sunni sect of Mohammedans (Islam). The petitioners have filed this petition seeking a direction to the State/respondent No. 1 to 5 to intervene in the matter and take appropriate action against the respondent No. 6 to 11. 5. On hearing leamed counsel for the petitioners and pemsal of the documents, it appears that there is a dispute with regard to ' AIR 1962 SC 853 2 (1994) 6 SCC 360 ^ -^^ 5-2- 6. 7. tenets, scriptures and performance of religious functions, which cannot be decided by the High Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction. The State Govemment can also not be directed to interfere with the religious perfonnance of the parties unless it is found that there is violation ofconstitutional provisions, mles and regulations or law. The cases cited by leamed counsel for the petitioners are not relevant to the dispute involved in the instant case. The apprehension of the petitioners that they may excommunicated, the best fomm may be religious institutions and religious leaders. Thus, this petition is not maintainable on the ground firstly, that disputed question of facts are involved and secondly.it relates to tenets, observance of tenets, scriptures and religious performance, and thirdly, there is a dispute befrween the petitioners and the private respondent No. 6 to 11, which cannot besettled in a writ petition. However, it is open to the petitioners, if so advised, to take recourse to competent civil court for adjudication ofthe disputes. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable at the motion stage itself, with liberty, as aforestated. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Amit