Overview
- On February 27 the High Court rejected a Sambhal order capping namaz at 20 people and told the SP and District Magistrate to resign or seek transfer if they cannot enforce the rule of law.
- The bench reaffirmed that prayers on private property do not require state permission, with intervention justified only when activities spill onto public land.
- At the March 16 hearing, the judges asked whether similar limits would ever be placed on Hindus praying at home and stressed equal application of the rule of law.
- The court flagged discrepancies in the petitioner’s filings, noted the absence of site photographs, and said the structure appeared not to be a mosque, cautioning that the petition could face costs.
- The Sambhal case remains pending with directions for the petitioner to submit photographs and revenue records and for the state to file its response, as coordinate benches have separately ordered non‑interference with private‑property prayers in Budaun and provided protection in a related Bareilly matter.