Use of microphones not an integral part of ‘azaan’: HC

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, May 2

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has asserted that “azaan” was an essential part of Muslim religion. But the use of microphones was certainly not an integral part of “azaan”.

The assertion came as Justice MMS Bedi dismissed a petition for directions to register an FIR against Sonu Nigam for allegedly committing a cognizable offence Nigam had, among other things, tweeted: “I’m not a Muslim and I have to be woken up by the azaan in the morning. When will this forced religiousness end in India”. He had also asserted: “And by the way Mohammed did not have electricity when he made Islam. Why do I have to have this cacophony after Edison?”

The petitioner, Aash Mohammad, asserted that Nigam, being a playback singer and a celebrity, was required to act with responsibility and ensure that the rights to freedom of religion and conscious were not infringed.

The Bench was told that the petitioner had filed a representation to Ganaur police station alleging violation of fundamental right. He had added the country was secular and provided right to freedom of religion. Nigam had no right to oppose the petitioner’s religious rights and the action was punishable under Section 295-A of the IPC.

Justice Bedi asserted that a specific controversy on use of microphones for “azaan” came up before the Calcutta High Court. It was held that “azaan” was definitely an integral and essential part of the Muslim religion.

It was also observed that “azaan” was morning call in high pitch for others to join prayers. The use of microphone was a practice developed by someone and it was not there in the past.

Justice Bedi asserted: “Azaan is no doubt an essential part of the Muslim religion but the use of microphones is certainly not an integral part of ‘azaan’. A combined reading of the tweet one to four (shows these) are meant to criticise the use of electricity/microphones for religious purposes. There is no violation of Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution of India curtailing the freedom of conscious practice and propagation of religion or to manage religious affairs….

“After considering the provisions of law and the sensitive issue which has been sought to be exaggerated, I am of the opinion that the present petition is a cheap mode of attaining publicity by making a well-known singer scapegoat in the name of religion. Such a practice deserves to be deprecated to secure the spirit of preamble and to perform our fundamental duties to uphold and protect the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India and to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of India…”