Allahabad High Court Orders Security for Haseen Khan
The Allahabad High Court has mandated 24/7 armed security for Haseen Khan following a controversial incident where he was allegedly prevented from offering Namaz inside his private residence. The court’s ruling comes in response to a petition filed by Tarik Khan, who sought permission for religious gatherings during Ramadan.
In its directive, the court ordered that two armed guards accompany Haseen Khan wherever he goes until further notice. Justice Atul Sreedharan emphasized that any incident of violence affecting Khan or his property would be presumed to have occurred at the instance of the State. “Any incident of violence that afflicts him or his property shall be prima facie understood to have occurred at the instance of the State,” he stated.
The controversy traces back to an incident on January 16, 2026, when a group allegedly attempted to conduct Namaz inside Khan’s home. Haseen Khan claimed he was detained by police while praying with family members, and he further alleged that he was coerced into signing a document he could not read due to illiteracy. This incident raised significant concerns regarding the enforcement of religious freedoms in private spaces.
On January 27, 2026, the court had previously issued contempt notices to Bareilly District Magistrate Avinash Singh and Senior Superintendent of Police Anurag Arya for their interference in the prayer activities. The court’s recent ruling reinforces its stance on protecting constitutional religious freedoms while holding authorities accountable for their actions.
The court has summoned both Singh and Arya to appear in person on March 23, 2026, at 2:00 PM. The court indicated that failure to appear could result in non-bailable warrants being issued against them. “If the two officers fail to appear in person, their presence may be secured through the issuance of a non-bailable warrant,” the court warned.
Furthermore, the High Court ruled that no prior state permission is required for religious gatherings within private property, as long as these activities do not spill over into public roads or spaces. This ruling is expected to have broader implications for religious practices in private settings across the region.
As the case develops, observers are keenly awaiting the next hearing, where final orders are expected to be issued. The court’s decisions in this matter could set important precedents regarding the intersection of religious freedoms and state authority in India.
