Azan allowed during Lockdown, but without Loudspeakers

Shaunak Choudhury | SVKM’s NMIMS Kirit P. Mehta School of Law | 16^th May 2020

Afzal Ansari v. State of U.P. PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. – 570 of 2020

Facts

The Petitioners raised a Public Interest Litigation to seek permission to recite Azan by one person, the ‘Muezzin’ (person who calls the Azan) through a loudspeaker in the cities of Ghazipur and Farrukhabad. The Petitioners claimed that they were being restricted by the administration due to the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown regulations. It was claimed that the administration had put up unsigned notices that said that the mosques will not be allowed to recite Azan. They said that the restriction was unconstitutional because it violates the fundamental right to practice religion under article 25 as it restricts the recitation of Azan with a loudspeaker. 

The Respondent, the State of Uttar Pradesh argued that the regulations for the lockdown did not allow any religious activities or congregations. The Respondent added that since the Azan is a call for congregation, it cannot be permitted. It argued that Azan was not being offered since 24^th March 2020, voluntarily so there was no administrative move that specifically banned Azan.

The Petitioners prayed for the permission for letting the Azan happen with the use of loudspeakers, especially since it was the time of Ramzan when fasting begins from morning Namaz (Fajr) and ends with evening Namaz (Maghrib). They did not want any other person to come to the mosques,and assured the Court that Namaz will be read in people’s houses itself and the lockdown will be adhered to.

Issues 

1. Whether any order prohibiting or restricting the recitation of Azan, through sound amplifying devices, is violative of the Article 25 of the Constitution of India and therefore arbitrary and unconstitutional?
2. Whether the recital of Azan by Muezzin/authorized person violates any of the orders or guidelines issued by the Government or administration or otherwise adversely impacts the containment measures of Covid19 crisis?

Judgement

1. The Petitioners had argued that Azan using loudspeaker is essential to Islam as the practice evolved from just using a loud voice to using sound amplifiers to fit the larger population of Muslims today, The Court noted that Azan during Prophet Mohammad’s time was recited by someone, just by using a loud voice, not a sound amplifier. The technology came much later and hence cannot be called an essential practice of Islam. The verdict refers to several cases such as Om Birangana Religious Society v. State ((1997) 1 ICC 652 (Cal)), Moulana Mufti Syed Mohammed Noorur Rehman Barkati v. State of West Bengal (1998 SCC OnLine Cal 73), Church of God in India v. K.K.R. Majesty ((2000) 7 SCC 282) and Masroor Ahmad v. State of U.P. (2020 SCC OnLine All 43). All these affirm the fact that using loudspeakers is Noise Pollution and when they are used without the State’s permission or from 10pm to 6am as per the Noise Pollution Rules 2000. Hence Azan with loudspeakers shall not be permitted as it is a violation of right to sleep (under article 21) and right to silence (under article 19(1) (a)) .
2. The Respondents had argued that the Azan was a call for congregation. But the Court found the claim to be baseless as the Petitioners themselves said that they do not wish to call people to the mosques to congregate. They only wish for one man to be able to recite the Azan. Nothing in the COVID-19 lockdown regulations barred the reciting of Azan without loudspeakers, thus the Petitioners were allowed to recite it but without sound amplifying devices. 

As the High Court itself put it, neither the Respondent, nor the Petitioner won the case. Both of them lost one issue each. The COVID lockdown guidelines were upheld and the religious practice during Ramzan was also honored.