Madhya Pradesh High Court
Mohammed Hasam Khatri vs State Of M.P. Through Home Department on 4 March, 2024
Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT I N D O R E
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
ON THE 4th March, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 1510 of 2020
BETWEEN:-
MOHAMMED HASAM KHATRI S/O LATE
MOHD. KASAM KHATRI, AGED ABOUT 65
YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS, R/O WARD
1.
NO. 4, BHEEL MOHALLA, SANAWAD (MADHYA
PRADESH)
MOHAMMAD HANIF KHAN S/O LATE MOHD.
KASAM KHATRI, AGED 60 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O: HOUSE NO. 50,
2.
WARD NO. 4, BHEEL MOHALLA, SANAWAD
,DIST KHARGONE (MADHYA PRADESH)
MOHAMMAD SALIM KHATRI S/O LATE MOHD.
KASAM KHATRI, AGED 55 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O: HOUSE NO.
3. 58/47, WARD NO. 4, BHEEL MOHALLA,
SANAWAD, DIST KHARGONE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
MOHAMMAD SADIK KHATRI S/O LATE MOHD.
KASAM KHATRI, AGED 50 YEARS,
4. OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O: WARD NO. 5,
AZAD MOHALLA, SANAWAD, DIST
KHARGONE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI MOHAMMED IQBAL KHAN,COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER).
AND
STATE OF M.P. THROUGH PRINCIPAL
1. SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT VALLABH
BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SREEVIDYA
Signing time: 04-03-
2024 16:27:05
2
2. COLLECTOR, COLLECTOR OFFICE DIST.
KHARGONE (MADHYA PRADESH)
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE S.P.OFFICE
3. DIST KHARGONE (MADHYA PRADESH)
POLICE STATION OFFICER, POLICE STATION
SANADWAD SANADWAD DIST KHARGONE
4.
(MADHYA PRADESH)
MIRZA KHALID BEG S/O MIRZA KHURSHID
PRESIDENT ANJUMAN ISLAM GULSHNABAD
5. R/O: BEHIND HUSSAIN MASJID, SANAWAD,
DIST KHARGONE (MADHYA PRADESH)
SHEIKH SHOEB S/O HAMID BABA,
SECRETARY, ANJUMAN ISLAAM
GULSHANABAD, SANAWAD R/O: BEHIND
6.
HUSSAIN MASJID SANADAWAD, DIST
KHARGONE (MADHYA PRADESH)
SIRAJ PEHALWAN VICE PRESIDENT ANJUMAN
ISLAAM GULSHNABAD, SANAWAD R/O:
7. ISLAMPURA CHOURAHA, SANAWAD DIST
KHARGONE (MADHYA PRADESH)
KALIM KHAN S/O AHMED KHAN VICE
PRESIDENT ANJUMAN ISLAAM
GULSHANABAAD SANAWAD R/O: NEAR PANI
8.
KI TANKI, SANAWAD DIST KHARGONE
(MADHYA PRADESH)
DILAWAR BEG S/O SHARIF BEG, JOINT
SECRETARY, ANJUMAN ISLAAM
GULSHANBAD, SANAWAD OCCUPATION:
9. JOINT SECREATRY R/O: OPP. KABRISTHAN,
KHANDWA ROAD, SANAWAD DIST KHARGONE
(MADHYA PRADESH)
SHEIKH SARFARAZ, JOINT SECRETARY,
ANJUMAN ISLAAM, GULSHANABAD
SANAWAD OCCUPATION: JOINT SECRETARY
10.
R/O: AZAD ROAD, ANJUMAN MADARSA
SANAWAD, DIST KHARGONE (MADHYA
PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SREEVIDYA
Signing time: 04-03-
2024 16:27:05
3
.....RESPONDENTS
(MS. ASHI VAIDYA, PANEL LAWYER FOR THE RESPONDENTS NO. 1 TO
4/STATE).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reserved on : 02.02.2024
Pronounced on : 04.03.2024
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This petition having been heard and reserved for judgment, coming on
for pronouncement this day, Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari passed
the following:
ORDER
Heard finally with the consent of both the parties.
1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the
petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
(i) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondent's state
to ensure that respondents committee and any other person will
restrain the petitioners to use Gray yard of city sanawad.
(ii) the Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondent's state
to ensure that respondents committee and any other person will
restrain the petitioners to enter into the mosque and offering the
namaz any mosque of the city sanawad.
(iii) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondents state
to take appropriate steps against the respondents committee and
consider the representation of the petitioners and to ensure that no
violation erupts with the petitioners in future.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioners are citizens of India
and permanent residents of Sanawad, District Khargone. A mosque is situated
in the city of Sanawad where the petitioners offer namaz since their childhood.
Their father, grandfather and forefathers were also residents of city Sanawad.
They also used to offer prayers in the mosque and after death they all were
buried at Sanawad graveyard. Petitioners belong to 'Tabligi Jamat' while the
respondents belong to 'Barelvi Jamat'. Respondents No.5 to 10 had
constituted a committee named Anjuman Islam Gulshanabad, Sanawad which
is not a registered committee. The aforesaid committee conducted a 'Khap'
Panchayat and passed one-sided resolution against the petitioner leveling
certain false allegations on the ground that they are not following the God and
rasul. As a consequence of the resolution, the petitioners and their family
members were not allowed to enter into the mosque at sanawad for offering
namaz and also restrained them from entering into the graveyard. In view of
the aforesaid inaction on the part of the respondents, the petitioners'
constitutional rights are being violated and they are unable to offer namaz and
enter the graveyard. Therefore, it is prayed that the respondents be directed to
ensure that such fundamental rights of the petitioners may not be infringed.
3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1 to 4, by
filing a reply has opposed the prayer and submitted that the present writ
petition is not maintainable since the relief is sought against a committee
which is governed under the provisions of Wakf Act and therefore, the Wakf
Board is the appropriate forum to ventilate their grievance.
4. Learned counsel for the State further submitted that the petitioners may
be relegated to avail the remedy before the Wakf Board. This Court cannot
enter into the disputed question of facts while exercising jurisdiction under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the petition deserves to be
dismissed.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
6. This Court finds force in the submissions made by learned counsel for
the respondent/State. In any case, the appropriate forum to ventilate all the
grievance is the Wakf Board and thereafter the Wakf Tribunal in the matter of
two sects of a religion and the relief which has been sought against the
committee which is registered and affiliated by the Wakf Board, therefore, it
would be appropriate to direct the petitioners to file representation/application
in accordance with law before the concerned Wakf Board within a period of
30 days from the date of order. In case, such a representation/application is
preferred by the petitioner, the same shall be decided in accordance with law
as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from
the date of this order.
7. This court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
8. With the aforesaid, this petition stands disposed of.
(S. A. DHARMADHIKARI)
vidya
JUDGE
