C Rejects Plea Against Curbs on Prayer at Madurai Dargah

The Supreme Court of India on February 10, 2026, declined to interfere with a Madras High Court order that restricts the offering of namaz at the Nellithoppu area of the Sikkandar Badhusha Avuliya Dargah, located atop the Thirupparankundram hill in Madurai district, Tamil Nadu, to the festival days of Ramzan and Bakrid. 

The decision brings to a close, at least for now, a constitutional challenge raising questions around religious freedom, essential religious practices, and the limits of judicial intervention in matters involving public order and competing religious claims.

What was the dispute about?

The controversy centres on the Nellithoppu area adjoining the dargah, which lies along a pathway leading to the Kasi Viswanathar Temple. For years, tensions have existed over the use of this space, particularly during prayer times. Authorities and local peace committees had evolved an arrangement permitting the offering of namaz at Nellithoppu only on Ramzan and Bakrid to avoid congestion, law and order issues, and obstruction to temple access.

This arrangement later became the subject of litigation, culminating in an October 10, 2025 judgment of the Madras High Court. The High Court upheld the restriction, reasoning that unrestricted prayers would obstruct the temple pathway and violate a civil court decree passed on August 25, 1923, which governed usage rights over the area.

Why was the High Court order challenged?

The petitioner, Imam Hussain, a regular worshipper at the dargah, approached the Supreme Court contending that the High Court had transformed a temporary, administrative compromise into a permanent judicial mandate. Appearing for him, senior advocate Prashant Bhushan argued that the High Court had overstepped constitutional limits by deciding when namaz—described as an essential religious practice—could be performed.

The plea asserted that limiting namaz to just two days in a year was arbitrary and violated Article 25 of the Constitution, which guarantees the freedom to profess, practise, and propagate religion. It also challenged the High Court’s observation that the practice of offering namaz at the Nellithoppu area was of “recent origin,” arguing that constitutional protection does not depend on a practice being followed from time immemorial.

What did the High Court rely on?

The High Court’s decision was shaped by two key considerations. First, it found that large congregations offering prayer at Nellithoppu would obstruct the pathway to the Kasi Viswanathar Temple and encroach upon temple premises. Second, it relied on the 1923 civil court decree, holding that allowing regular prayers would amount to a violation of settled civil rights over the area.

Notably, the October 2025 ruling was delivered by a third judge after a Division Bench of the High Court had delivered a split verdict in June 2025 on whether prayers could be permitted beyond festival days.

What did the Supreme Court decide?

After a short hearing, the Supreme Court declined to entertain the challenge. Without examining the constitutional issues in detail, the Court stated that it did not propose to interfere with the High Court’s order and dismissed the Special Leave Petition, while clarifying that it was not expressing any opinion on the substantive rights of the parties.

This means the Supreme Court left the High Court’s reasoning undisturbed, allowing the restriction on prayers at the Nellithoppu area to continue.