Bombay High Court permits animal sacrifice during Id, Urs at Vishalgad dargah
Permitting animal slaughter during the festivities, a Division Bench of Justices (Vacation Bench), Neela K. Gokhale and Firdosh P. Pooniwalla also placed certain conditions to comply with.
The Bench was hearing an application by the Hajrat Peer Malik Rehan Mira Saheb Dargah Trust, challenging a directive from the Deputy Director of Archaeology who had prohibited animal slaughter within the fort premises. The authorities cited that the ban was based on provisions of the Maharashtra Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act that prohibits slaughtering of animals and birds on the premises of a protected monument. A 1998 Aurangabad Bench judgment prohibits public animal sacrifices.
The Dargah Trust argued that the practice of animal sacrifice is an age-old practice going on the private land that is 1.4 km away from the fort and that the meat from sacrifice is distributed among the pilgrims and villagers.
The vacation Bench said, 'Considering the fact that a coordinate Bench has passed an order on June 14, 2024, and has already dealt with the issue and has permitted the prayer of the present IA, the same shall continue during the forthcoming festival of Id which is on June 7 and the Urs from June 8 to June 12.'
Disposing of the trust's application, the Bench observed, 'Needless to state, the same conditions which have been imposed in the June 14, 2024 order shall apply to the petitioners in the present interim application and also to devotees of dargah who come to sacrifice animals during Id and Urs. The conditions imposed on June 14, 2024, order shall be strictly complied with.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
5 hours ago
- Time of India
Chief justice urged to establish MP-MLA court, Green Bench at Dharwad HCB
Pic: Chief justice of Karnataka high court Justice Vibhu Bakhru being felicitated by advocates at Dharwad Bench of high court during his first visit to the Bench on Monday Dharwad: Chief Justice of Karnataka high court Justice Vibhu Bakhru said he was committed to resolving concerns faced by the litigants and advocates in the state. During his first visit to Dharwad Bench of high court on Monday after taking over as the CJ of Karnataka HC, Justice Bakhru addressed the members of HC Bench Bar Association and listened to the demands and concerns of the advocates. He was warmly welcomed by members of the legal fraternity, including senior advocates and jurists from the region. During his visit, the chief justice interacted with members of the High Court Advocates Association of the Dharwad Bench and reviewed various administrative issues. A delegation led by association president VM Sheelvanth and vice president Santosh Malagoudar submitted a memorandum of demands to the chief justice. Malagoudar highlighted the urgent need to increase the number of judges at the Dharwad Bench to ensure faster disposal of cases. Given that the bench serves the districts of Bagalkot, Belagavi, Dharwad, Gadag, Haveri, Uttara Kannada, and Koppal, he emphasised that a suitable increase in judicial strength is necessary to reduce case backlogs. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like American Investor Warren Buffett Recommends: 5 Books For Turning Your Life Around Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo The association also urged the CJ Bakhru to expedite the process of establishing the 'Advocates Bhavan' at the Dharwad Bench. Although the state govt has already allocated land for the project, delays in documentation with the building committee have stalled progress. The association appealed to the chief justice to intervene and direct the committee to initiate construction at the earliest. In addition, the association requested the establishment of a court to deal with cases pertaining to the elected representatives at the Dharwad Bench to handle cases involving elected representatives from the region. They also sought the transfer of such cases from principal bench to Dharwad. A major demand included the setting up of a 'Green Bench' at Dharwad dedicated to hearing cases related to environmental and ecological issues such as mining leases, land use, and pollution control. Currently, these matters are heard only at the Principal Bench in Bengaluru. The association urged decentralisation to make environmental justice more accessible to North Karnataka. On the occasion, 30 cases were listed before the bench headed by Chief Justice Bakhru. He attended to all 30 cases, Malagoudar said.
United News of India
6 hours ago
- United News of India
SC prohibits construction and commercial use near historic Gumti structure in Defence Colony
New Delhi, Aug 4 (UNI) The Supreme Court has directed that the park adjacent to the historic Gumti structure located in Defence Colony, New Delhi, must not be used for any purpose other than public recreation and preservation. The Court made it clear that no construction of facilities like badminton or basketball courts, nor any form of commercial activity, will be permitted due to the sensitive nature and spatial constraints of the area. A Bench comprising Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah was hearing a writ petition filed in 2019 seeking protection of the Gumti under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. "The only direction which needs to be given here is that the park should not be used for any other purpose. No activities such as construction of a badminton or basketball court shall be undertaken, considering the limitations of the area itself," the Bench observed. It added, 'Needless to say, there shall be no commercial activity or kiosks/shops allowed in the vicinity.' The petition was filed after the Defence Colony Welfare Association (DCWA) allegedly carried out unauthorized alterations near the monument, despite its historical significance. Representing the petitioner was Senior Advocate Shikhil Shiv Suri. Senior Advocates Garima Prasad and Gopal Sankaranarayanan, along with Advocate Shubhranshu Padhi, represented the respondents, with Sankaranarayanan also serving as the Court Commissioner. The case has a long history. In 2004, the Central Government issued a gazette notification intending to declare the Gumti as a monument of national importance. However, this was met with objections from the DCWA, causing delays within the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). After the Delhi High Court dismissed the petitioner's plea for protection under the 1958 Act, the matter was brought before the Supreme Court. In a significant development on July 16, 2025, the apex court criticized the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) for its actions, noting that they appeared to obstruct justice. The Court had then considered issuing contempt notice and directed the CBI to conduct a preliminary inquiry into the unauthorized occupation and modifications around the monument. The Court also instructed the MCD to demolish all unauthorised structures, clean the area, and hand it over to the Department of Archaeology. The Bench took note of ongoing efforts and pending tasks including, finalising and completing the Gumti's restoration plan. Publishing the official notification declaring it a protected monument. Clearing remaining debris and leveling the park area and finalizing the landscape plan with permissible public activities like cycling and walking. The Bench emphasized that the park, which consists of four quadrants, should be maintained and beautified for the benefit of the general public while preserving its natural character. The matter has been adjourned for further compliance and monitoring. UNI SNG RN
India Today
8 hours ago
- India Today
Bombay High Court raps auto drivers, refuses to entertain plea against bike taxis
In a strong rebuke to auto-rickshaw drivers seeking to curb bike taxi operations in Mumbai, the Bombay High Court on Monday refused to entertain a petition that alleged illegal plying of app-based bike taxis using private vehicles. The court also criticised the city's traditional auto and taxi services, remarking that they often operate like a "cartel."A bench comprising Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Neela Gokhale came down heavily on four Mumbai auto-rickshaw drivers, who had filed a petition urging the court to enforce restrictions against bike taxis operated by aggregators like Rapido. The petitioners alleged that the bike taxis were using white number plates — designated for private vehicles — instead of the required yellow-and-black transport plates, and were thus operating illegally, affecting their the court declined to intervene, observing that the petition appeared aimed at creating a monopoly. 'You want to indirectly take an order and put pressure on them (bike services). There cannot be a monopoly. If a single person has to travel, then it is better to take a bike than an auto or taxi,' the bench stated. The state government had recently notified the Maharashtra Bike-Taxi Rules, 2025, on July 4, paving the way for regulated operations of app-based bike taxis, subject to licensing, safety, and operational the petitioners claimed they were merely seeking enforcement of the rules against unlicensed vehicles, the bench was unpersuaded. 'Everyone has seen the high-handedness of autorickshaw and taxi drivers. That is why people prefer alternatives. Try catching a rickshaw during monsoon,' the bench the judges pointed out the irony in the petitioners' argument about rule enforcement. 'This will stop only when you stop refusing to take people. We have seen on the streets how taxi and rickshaw drivers treat customers — their language, tone, and high-handedness. Each one of us has faced this.'Criticising the perceived entitlement of traditional transport operators, the bench added, 'Tomorrow you will say even the metro should not start. It is because of the high-handedness of the 'kali peelis' (local way of calling taxis in Mumbai) that Ola and Uber started picking up.'The court also called out the practice of rickshaw drivers allegedly forming informal cartels — refusing passengers and preventing others from taking them with the bench indicating it would dismiss the petition, the petitioners chose to withdraw it.- EndsMust Watch
