No Fundamental Right to a Specific Procession Route: Allahabad HC Dismisses Muharram PIL from Sambhal

A Division Bench held that Article 25 does not entitle a community to use any particular road for religious processions, especially where an agreed alternate arrangement already exists.

The Allahabad High Court on 24 June 2026 dismissed a public interest litigation filed by residents of Hazratnagar Garhi in Sambhal district, who sought permission to take out the Alam/Tazia procession on Muharram along a new route to the Karbala at Village Sirsi. A Division Bench of Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Arun Kumar, with the judgment delivered by Justice J.J. Munir, held that while Article 25 of the Constitution guarantees the right to practise one's religion, there is no fundamental right to use a particular road for the performance of religious rites. The bench found the petitioners bound by a written agreement dated 28 July 2023, already pasted onto the festival register maintained by the district administration, which had settled an alternate arrangement for the procession.

The Dispute Before the Court

The traditional route for the Muharram procession in Hazratnagar Garhi ran from Hazrat Nagar Garhi to Railway Crossings LC/8C and LC/9C, and had been in use since 1952. In 2022, the Railways electrified the track passing through the crossing. During the Muharram procession that year, members of the procession came in contact with high-voltage electricity, causing a fatal accident. The Railways subsequently closed the crossing by constructing permanent walls on both sides.

After the old route was blocked, the petitioners sought permission each year from 2023 to 2025, by registered post, to use a different path — one that would take the procession away from the Sirsi-Bilari Road and allow them to reach the Karbala, recorded in the revenue records as Gata No. 1650/1 in Village Sirsi. The petitioners said the Sirsi-Bilari Road route involved a travel time of three to four hours on the tenth day of Muharram, making it inconvenient for the procession. They also sought information under the Right to Information Act, 2005, but the Tahsil authorities' response, signed by the Lekhpal of Sirsi on applications dated 23 April 2025 and 6 June 2025, showed a different route that was not clear.

The petitioners moved fresh applications on 17 May 2026 and 25 May 2026, again by registered post, seeking permission for a procession route that would not create future disputes. Muharram commenced on 18 June 2026, with the tenth day falling on 26/27 June 2026. Alleging inaction by the authorities, the petitioners filed PIL No. 1495 of 2026 before the High Court.

The Administration's Stand and the 2023 Agreement

On 22 June 2026, the bench directed the Standing Counsel to seek instructions. The State's counsel indicated that an alternate route had already been settled by agreement between the parties. The matter was listed for 23 June 2026, when written instructions were produced by Mr. Girijesh Kumar Tripathi, Additional Chief Standing Counsel, signed by the City Magistrate, Sambhal, acting as Link Officer for the Deputy Collector.

The bench took note of the fact that the instructions had been signed by the City Magistrate rather than the District Magistrate, and remarked that the District Magistrate could not delegate his duties to other officers when called upon by the High Court.

The instructions disclosed the terms of an agreement dated 28 July 2023, to which members of the Muslim community of the town were party. The agreement, pasted onto the festival register maintained by the administration, provided that the procession would proceed along the customary route and reach the government tubewell. The Alam would be dismantled there, and its parts carried back by hand by members of the procession or those authorised on their behalf.

On the question of the new route sought by the petitioners — along the Sirsi-Bilari Main Road to the Karbala — the administration's position was that members of other religious communities had opposed it, contending that this was not the customary route for the Muharram procession and that they objected to the establishment of a new tradition. The administration said permitting the new route would be contrary to the 2023 agreement and risked social friction.

How the Bench Reasoned

The bench accepted that the old route had become unavailable after 2022 on account of the railway electrification and the fatal accident. It acknowledged that the petitioners genuinely sought a route to reach the Karbala. However, it drew a clear distinction between the right to practise religion and the right to practise it in a particular way.

The bench observed that a fortiori, the earmarking of routes for processions involving large numbers of people is essentially a matter of law and order, for which the civil and police administration bear responsibility. If, upon assessment of the physical and geographical situation and the views of members of other communities, the administration had decided that the proposed new route could not be permitted, no right inhered in the petitioners to insist on that route.

The bench was careful to note what the case was not about: “This is not a case where the petitioners have been asked not to take out the procession at all.” The right to take out the procession and perform the religious rites had not been prohibited. What had been refused was the use of a specific road. The bench held that there is “absolutely no fundamental right to the practice of one's religion, that may entitle them or the community to use a particular road for the performance of religious rites.”

The bench also held that the petitioners were bound by the terms of the agreement dated 28 July 2023, which was on the festival register. The administration's stand that the new route had been opposed by members of other religious communities and could lead to breaches of public order was accepted as a legitimate ground for refusal.

Outcome

The Division Bench found no merit in the petition and dismissed it on 24 June 2026. The petitioners remain bound by the 2023 agreement, under which the procession proceeds along the customary route to the government tubewell, where the Alam is dismantled and its parts carried back by hand. The order is marked as a speaking order but not reportable.