#Article 25

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that religious prayers and rituals cannot be curtailed by state authorities absent tangible proof of a threat to public order, reinforcing that fundamental rights under Article 25 are not contingent on administrative discretion. This sets a critical precedent for minority religious groups facing unwarranted interference in places of worship, especially in rural and semi-urban districts.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that once stamp duty is paid on a registered Agreement for Sale deemed a conveyance under Article 25 of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, no further duty is payable on the subsequent Conveyance Deed. This prevents double taxation in property transactions and provides clarity to housing societies and buyers navigating post-agreement transfers.

Madhya Pradesh High Court refuses anticipatory bail in a case under the M.P. Freedom of Religion Act, 2021, holding that grave allegations of mass conversion through inducement override constitutional religious freedom claims. The ruling underscores that communal harmony concerns can limit Article 25 rights where prima facie evidence of unlawful conversion exists.

The Madurai High Court has permitted the Kitta Muttu ritual during the Chithirai festival, conditioning its approval on strict veterinary and police oversight to prevent animal cruelty. This ruling reinforces that religious practices under Article 25 are protected, but not absolute - they must yield to statutory welfare obligations, setting a precedent for balancing faith and animal rights in Tamil Nadu’s cultural festivals.

Madurai HC rules that temple committees cannot obstruct devotees from participating in festivals even if they refuse to pay customary contributions like 'Thalaikattu Vari'. The court reaffirms that religious practices under Article 25 must remain voluntary, striking down coercive financial demands as unconstitutional.

Madras High Court ruled that the Waqf Board cannot obstruct or impose administrative conditions on a decades-old religious practice of serving food during the 27th night of Ramzan. The court emphasized that religious freedoms under Article 25 must be facilitated, not restricted, ensuring the devotional link between donor and recipient remains unsevered.

Telangana High Court holds that denial of religious procession permission must follow due process, consider past incidents, and issue reasoned orders under Articles 19 and 25.

High Court of Telangana upholds petitioners' constitutional right to conduct Sammakka Saralamma Jathara on private land, restraining state interference despite pending Section 43 notifications.