SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS MADRAS HC’S “BALANCED” ORDER ON MUSLIM WORSHIP AT THIRUPPARANKUNDRAM HILLS:

The Supreme Court on February 9 declined to interfere with a judgment of the Madras High Court that restricted the scope of Muslim worship at the Nellithoppu area located atop the Thiruparankundram Hills in Madurai district, Tamil Nadu. The High Court had held that Muslim devotees were entitled to offer prayers at the site only on the occasions of Ramzan and Bakri-Id and had further prohibited animal sacrifice in the area.

The challenge before the Supreme Court was brought by M. Imam Hussain, a worshipper at the Sikkandar Badhusha Avuliya Dargah, which owns approximately 33 cents of land at Nellithoppu. The petitioner questioned the legality of the High Court’s October 2025 judgment, arguing that the restrictions imposed were arbitrary and violative of the right to freely practice religion under Article 25 of the Constitution.

A Bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice P. B. Varale refused to interfere with the High Court’s ruling, describing it as a balanced order. The Bench observed that it saw no reason to disturb the findings of the High Court and clarified that it was upholding the impugned judgment without expressing any opinion on the substantive rights of the parties involved.

During the hearing, senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioner, contended that there had never been any law and order issues arising from prayers being offered at the site. He emphasized that the grievance lay in the High Court’s restriction limiting prayers exclusively to Ramzan and Bakri-Id, despite acknowledging that the land in question belonged to Muslim worshippers. According to him, while reasonable conditions could be imposed to maintain public order, a complete restriction on prayers on other occasions was unjustified.

Justice Aravind Kumar, however, noted that the very fact that a peace committee meeting had been convened indicated the presence of law and order concerns. Both judges on the Bench expressed agreement with the High Court’s reasoning and concluded that the restrictions struck an appropriate balance between competing claims and sensitivities surrounding the site.

The dispute relates to the Thiruparankundram Hills, which house the ancient Arulmighu Subramaniaswamy Thirukovil, a major Hindu place of worship, alongside the Dargah at Nellithoppu. The offering of namaz and the practice of animal sacrifice at the hill have long been contentious, given the shared religious significance and the physical proximity of the places of worship.

In June 2025, a Division Bench of the Madras High Court delivered a split verdict on the issue. Justice Nisha Banu declined to interfere with the practice of animal sacrifice, while Justice S. Srimathy took the view that the Dargah authorities should approach a civil court to establish their customary right to conduct animal sacrifice and prayers beyond specific festivals. Justice Srimathy also observed that the practice of offering namaz at Nellithoppu appeared to be of recent origin and that large congregations could obstruct access to other parts of the hill, including pathways leading to the Kasi Viswanathan temple.

Due to the split verdict, the matter was referred to a third judge. On October 10, 2025, the third judge held that Muslim devotees had limited rights to offer namaz only on Ramzan and Bakri-Id. The judge further ruled that animal sacrifice, cooking, or the carrying and serving of non-vegetarian food would not be permitted at the site until a competent civil court determined the existence of any customary right in that regard.

These findings were challenged before the Supreme Court as being contrary to constitutional guarantees. Separately, the site had witnessed further controversy in December 2025 when the Madras High Court permitted the lighting of a lamp near the Dargah, following which the State was pulled up in contempt proceedings for failing to implement the order on the ground of law and order concerns.