Halal ban: No order against coercive action but SC issues notice to UP Govt
text_fields
The Supreme Court has rejected a plea seeking an order against the coercive action in pursuance of a ban on Halal-certified products in UP but issued a notice to the Uttar Pradesh government challenging the constitutional validity of the ban on the manufacturing, storage, sale, and distribution of food products with Halal certification within the state.
The petition, filed by Halal India Private Limited and its director Mujakirullah, argues that the ban is an "attack on the followers of Islam religion."
The bench, comprising Justices B R Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, issued notice to the Uttar Pradesh government to respond to the plea. Halal India Private Limited, claiming to be an "internationally recognized halal certification provider," contends that the ban, issued on November 18, 2023, has nationwide ramifications and has created fear among the populace, particularly the Islamic community.
The petition asserts that the ban has triggered widespread apprehension and anxiety, with the fear that other states may replicate similar measures. The plea further points out instances where leaders from different states have expressed support for imposing a comparable ban, intensifying the pervasive fear within the minority communities.
The plea also seeks the quashing of a First Information Report (FIR) filed against the petitioners on November 11, 2023, at the Hazratganj police station in Uttar Pradesh. The FIR alleges the issuance of forged Halal certificates for financial gains and claims that the sale of Halal-certified products fosters social animosity.
The petitioners deny these allegations, asserting that they are false, baseless, and solely intended to target a specific community.
Moreover, the plea challenges the rationale behind the ban, arguing that the Halal certification mentioned on certain food products, as well as non-food items like soap, oil, facial creams, toothpaste, etc., does not violate any provisions of the Food Safety and Standards Act of 2006.
The petition contends that the impugned notification misinterprets the law by suggesting that such certifications can only be granted by the competent authority under Section 29 of the Act.
The petition highlights the absence of an approved certifying authority by the respondents, making it apparent that the restriction imposed by the notification is an outright attack on the followers of Islam. The plea emphasizes that the ban targets products meeting specific criteria permitted by Islamic religious practices.
