HOPE OF GLORY MINISTRY TRUST THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN DILIP BHORE V. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 2026:BHC-KOL:1762-DB:

DATE: 14.03.2026

COURT: High Court of Bombay

BENCH: Justice Madhav J. Jamdar and Justice Pravin S. Patil

FACTS:

The petitioner, a registered Public Trust under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950, organised the “Maharashtra Prayer Festival, 2026” at the MIDC premises in Kavalapur, Taluka Miraj, District Sangli, from 13th to 15th March 2026. After obtaining all requisite permissions, including from MIDC (10.03.2026), Gram Panchayat Kavalapur, Sangli-Miraj-Kupwad Municipal Corporation (including Fire Brigade), and Sangli Rural Police Station for use of loudspeakers (07.03.2026) and depositing the necessary occupation charges and security amount, the Trust made elaborate arrangements, including deployment of 140 private security personnel and installation of fire-safety equipment. The event commenced on 13th March 2026 with an estimated gathering of 50,000 persons.

On 09.03.2026 the Police Inspector, Sangli Rural Police Station, cancelled the permission citing certain conditions. After the Trust filed a detailed reply on 11.03.2026, the Police re-granted permission on 12.03.2026. However, on 13.03.2026 (served at 02:00 a.m. on 14.03.2026), the Police once again cancelled the permission and MIDC followed suit by revoking its earlier approval. An FIR (CR No.80 of 2026) was registered under Section 3(2) of the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and Other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013 and Sections 223 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Aggrieved by the sudden cancellation in the midst of the ongoing event, the Trust filed the present urgent writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution on 14.03.2026.

ISSUES:

The primary issues were whether the abrupt cancellation of permission by the Police and MIDC on 13.03.2026 (after earlier grant, re-grant, and commencement of the event with 50,000 attendees) was arbitrary and illegal; whether such cancellation violated the petitioner’s and participants’ fundamental rights under Articles 19, 21, 25 and 26 of the Constitution; and whether the registration of an FIR under the Black Magic Act and BNS, without any demonstrated threat to public order, morality or health, could justify withdrawal of permission mid-event.

JUDGEMENT WITH REASONING:

The Bombay High Court (Kolhapur Bench) allowed the writ petition. It quashed the impugned cancellation orders dated 13.03.2026 passed by the Police Inspector, Sangli Rural Police Station and by MIDC. The earlier permissions granted by MIDC (10.03.2026) and the Police (12.03.2026) were restored, permitting the Trust to continue the Maharashtra Prayer Festival, 2026. The Court directed the Chairman of the Trust to file an undertaking that the provisions of the Black Magic Act would not be violated and appointed the Police Inspector, Sangli Rural Police Station as Vigilance Officer under Section 5 of the Act.

The Court held that the repeated flip-flops by the authorities, granting permission on 07.03.2026, cancelling it on 09.03.2026, re-granting it on 12.03.2026 after considering the Trust’s detailed reply, allowing the event to commence on 13.03.2026, and then abruptly cancelling it again at 02:00 a.m. on 14.03.2026 demonstrated arbitrary and mala fide exercise of power. Even the FIR registered under the Black Magic Act and BNS did not allege any disturbance of public order, criticism of other religions, or any immediate threat to law and order. The event had been conducted peacefully with all statutory clearances and elaborate safety arrangements. In the absence of any material showing violation of public order, morality or health, the sudden midnight cancellation was held to be violative of the fundamental rights of the 50,000 citizens assembled for the event under Articles 19 (freedom to assemble and express), 21 (right to live with dignity), 25 and 26 (freedom of conscience and right to profess, practise and propagate religion).

The Court further observed that while the right to hold a religious event is subject to public order, morality and health, no such ground was made out by the State. The petitioner, on instructions, offered to file an immediate undertaking by its Chairman that the provisions of the Black Magic Act would not be contravened. Accepting the undertaking and appointing the Police Inspector as Vigilance Officer under Section 5 of the Act was considered sufficient safeguard. The authorities could not be permitted to interfere mid-event in such a high-handed manner when all prior permissions had been granted and acted upon. The writ petition was therefore disposed of by quashing the cancellation orders and restoring the earlier permissions, with liberty to the Police to monitor compliance in accordance with law.

ANALYSIS:

The Bombay High Court’s judgment strongly condemns the arbitrary and high-handed manner in which the Police and MIDC withdrew permission for a large-scale religious event mid-way, after repeatedly granting and re-granting the same. The Court highlighted the authorities’ flip-flop conduct, granting permission on 7th March, cancelling it on 9th March, re-granting it on 12th March after considering the petitioner’s detailed reply, allowing the event to commence with nearly 50,000 attendees on 13th March, and then abruptly cancelling it again at 2:00 a.m. on 14th March as classic mala fide and illegal exercise of power. Importantly, neither the FIR registered under the Black Magic Act nor the cancellation orders demonstrated any actual threat to public order, morality, or health. The event was being conducted peacefully with all statutory approvals and adequate safety arrangements. The Court rightly held that such sudden midnight cancellation violated the fundamental rights of the participants under Articles 19 (freedom of assembly and expression), 21 (right to live with dignity), 25 and 26 (freedom of conscience and right to profess, practise and propagate religion).

The judgment strikes a fine balance between constitutional freedoms and regulatory concerns. While acknowledging that religious rights are subject to public order, morality and health, the Court found no material on record to justify interference. By directing the Trust’s Chairman to file an undertaking not to violate the Black Magic Act and by appointing the Police Inspector as Vigilance Officer under Section 5 of the Act, the Court provided adequate safeguards without stifling the ongoing event. This decision sends a strong message against arbitrary state action that disrupts lawfully organised large public gatherings and reaffirms that permissions, once granted and acted upon, cannot be withdrawn in a whimsical or mala fide manner, especially when thousands of citizens have already assembled exercising their fundamental rights.