Murder Convict Should Be Allowed To Keep Quran And Offer Namaz Five Times A Day: Allahabad High Court Tells Jail Superintendent Etawa :
By Rajesh Pandey
The Allahabad High Court recently issued a directive to the jail superintendent of Central Jail, Etawah, instructing him to ensure that a prisoner’s right to practice his religious beliefs during the holy month of Ramadan is not obstructed in any manner. The court specifically ordered that the prisoner be allowed to perform his five daily prayers and be permitted to keep a copy of the Quran in his possession.
This order was issued on Monday while the court was hearing a petition filed by Uzma Abid, the wife of Farhan Ahmed, a murder convict who is currently incarcerated in the high-security section of Central Jail, Etawah. Abid had approached the court, alleging that her husband was being denied the right to offer prayers because of his religious beliefs during the sacred month of Ramadan. She further claimed that authorities had confiscated his copy of the Quran, thereby restricting his ability to engage in religious study and worship.
In response to these allegations, the government’s legal representative informed the court that the jail authorities would examine the petitioner’s grievances and take appropriate action as per the provisions of the law.
Taking into account the circumstances of the case, the court decided to dispose of the petition while issuing clear instructions to the jail superintendent. The court directed that Farhan Ahmed’s right to practice his religion, particularly his routine of offering five daily prayers during Ramadan, must not be hindered. Additionally, the court ruled that he should be allowed to retain his copy of the Quran.
However, the court also made it clear that routine security measures within the jail premises would remain in place. The order specified that while the prisoner’s religious practices must be respected, the authorities could continue implementing necessary security protocols to ensure the safety and discipline of the inmates.
Farhan Ahmed was among those convicted in a high-profile murder case that shook Uttar Pradesh’s political landscape. According to his legal counsel, Deepak Kumar, Ahmed was found guilty in connection with the killing of Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) legislator Raju Pal and two others.
The murder took place on January 25, 2005, when Raju Pal, an emerging political leader, was returning home. As he was traveling through the Dhoomanganj area of Prayagraj, a group of armed assailants ambushed his vehicle and opened fire. The attack resulted in the deaths of Raju Pal and his associates, Devilal Pal and Sandeep Yadav. Several others, including Ruksana, Saif alias Saifulla, and Om Prakash Pal, sustained injuries in the violent assault.
The brutal killing was linked to an intense political rivalry between Raju Pal and former Member of Parliament Atiq Ahmed. The case, which drew significant public attention, was investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). After years of legal proceedings, a CBI court in Lucknow delivered its verdict last year, convicting six individuals, including Farhan Ahmed, for their roles in the crime.
Atiq Ahmed and his brother Ashraf, who were also accused in the case, were killed before the final court judgment was pronounced. Their deaths added another layer of controversy to an already contentious case, highlighting the deep-seated political tensions and criminal elements involved.
The Allahabad High Court’s latest ruling ensures that, despite his conviction and imprisonment, Farhan Ahmed retains the fundamental right to practice his religion. The decision has sparked discussions on the balance between prison regulations and the religious rights of inmates. Many legal experts and human rights advocates view the judgment as a reaffirmation of constitutional protections that guarantee freedom of religion, even for those serving prison sentences.
While the case itself remains a significant chapter in Uttar Pradesh’s political and criminal history, the recent court ruling underscores the judiciary’s stance on upholding religious rights, regardless of an individual’s legal status. Moving forward, jail authorities will be expected to comply with the court’s directives while maintaining security protocols within the prison.
