LONE VOICE OF NAZEER SOUGHT LARGER BENCH

New Delhi, Sept. 27: The observation in the 1994 Ismail Faruqui case that a mosque is not an essential part of Islam and namaz by Muslims can be offered anywhere, “even in open” was arrived without undertaking a comprehensive examination, Supreme Court judge Justice S Abdul Nazeer said Thursday.

The majority verdict by other members of the bench, comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Ashok Bhushan, declined to refer to a fivejudge constitution bench the issue of reconsideration of these observations made in its 1994 verdict during the hearing of the Ayodhya land dispute.

Justice Nazeer, who dissented with the majority verdict, said that considering the constitutional importance and significance, the matter should be referred to a larger bench.

Justice Nazeer framed four questions in his reference order to be adjudicated by the larger bench, including “Whether in the light of Shirur Mutt and other cases, an essential practice can be decided without a detailed examination of the beliefs, tenets and practice of the faith in question?”.

The second question he framed was “whether the test for determining the essential practice is both essentiality and integrality?”

The third question -“Does Article 25, only protect belief and practices of particular significance of a faith or all practices regarded by the faith as essential?”

The last question Justice Nazeer asked is “Do Articles 15, 25 and 26 (read with Article 14) allow the comparative significance of faiths to be undertaken?”