The Madras High Court held that the mere presence of a Dargah on land does not automatically place the property under the Waqf Board’s control. The Court ruled that the Board must first establish, in accordance with law, that the property is a valid Waqf before claiming jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court rebuked an advocate in the Sabarimala reference hearing for irrelevant submissions, saying he was going beyond the subject and must confine arguments to the issue. The Court also said, “Please don’t argue like this,” during proceedings.
The Supreme Court said there can be no anarchy, noting that managing religious institutions cannot mean operating without structure, and emphasised the need for rules as the nine-judge Bench heard petitions on Sabarimala women’s entry and religious freedom.
Today, On 7th July, Bombay High Court questioned the plea seeking a 9-day slaughter ban during Jain Paryushan Parv, asking, “Under which statutory obligation should slaughterhouses be closed?” The court cautioned against setting a precedent for similar future demands.
Today, On 6th June, The Bombay High Court told the petitioner asking for Bakri Eid namaz at August Kranti Maidan to approach the state government immediately, directing that the request be ideally considered within the same day without delay.
Today, On 3rd June, The Bombay High Court has permitted animal slaughter during Bakrid and Urs celebrations at Vishalgad Dargah in Kolhapur. This decision respects religious practices while balancing legal and cultural sensitivities in the region.
The Delhi High Court has temporarily stayed the CAG’s proposed audit of Ajmer Sharif Dargah’s accounts, citing procedural lapses under the CAG Act. The court found a prima facie case suggesting violations in audit initiation.
The Gujarat government defended its demolition activities in Gir Somnath before the Supreme Court, asserting the need to remove illegal encroachments on public land. In response to a legal challenge, the government emphasized adherence to legal procedures, while the petitioner accused authorities of targeting Muslim sites unlawfully. The case was adjourned for further review.
