Mohd. Farman Vs State Of Uttar Pradesh (2021): Article 25 Has Inbuilt Restrictions, And Therefore, May Not Protect The Right To Maintain Beard

Case Background

• In a circular dated 26th October 2020, the Director General of Police, U.P. issued guidelines in respect of wearing proper uniform and proper appearance warranted for the members of disciplined force.
• One of the guidelines is to not have beard, and the petitioner, irrespective of specific directions, failed to adhere to it.
• The petitioner submitted an application stating that he had maintained his beard according to the tenets of the Muslim Religion, however, the same was rejected on 13th November 2020. Consequently, he was suspended by an order dated 5th November 2020.
• The petitioner had filed two writ petitions before the Allahabad High Court. The first petition condemned the guidelines and consequent actions of the authorities, whereas, the second petition assailed the charge-sheet dated 29th July 2021.

Petitioner’s Submissions

• It was submitted that the conduct of the petitioner would not come under the purview of misconduct to attract a departmental inquiry, and therefore, the charge-sheet ought not to have been filed.
• It was further argued that the petitioner’s reason for maintaining his beard was due to his religious belief that is protected under Article 25 of the Constitution. Therefore, any action in this respect would be violative of the said Article.

Respondents’ Submissions

• The Respondents contended that the second writ petition was not maintainable on account of its pre-matureness, and therefore, the Court should not interfere with such charge-sheet or show cause notice.
• A number of cases were cited as references to strengthen the argument.

Court Order

• The Learned Judge opined that there was infirmity or illegality in the charge-sheet dated 29.07.2021 issued against the petitioner.
• It was also opined that members of the disciplined force must strictly follow the guidelines prescribed, and therefore non-cutting of the beard is not only a wrong behaviour but also misdemeanor, misdeed and delinquency of the petitioner.
• Article 25 of the Constitution has inbuilt restrictions, as a consequence of which maintaining beard may not be protected under the said Article, the Court stated.
• With these observations, the High Court dismissed both the writ petitions, and directed the authorities to conduct the inquiry against the petitioner in accordance with the law, and give the necessary order.

What are your thoughts on the case and judgement