25 Jan 2024 7:42 AM GMT
The Supreme Court on Thursday (January 25) issued notice in Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind Halal Trust's plea challenging the Uttar Pradesh government's ban on the manufacture, sale, storage and distribution of halal-certified products. It also protected Jamiat chief Mahmood Madani and other office-bearers of the trust from any coercive action.
A bench of Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta today agreed to hear a writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution by Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind Halal Trust. The court had earlier issued notice in two other pleas by Halal India Private Limited and Jamiat Ulama-e-Maharashtra challenging the ban imposed by the Uttar Pradesh Government on the "manufacture, sale, storage, and distribution of halal-certified products." The ban, implemented on November 18 last year, sparked controversy and prompted police raids on malls across the state to seize halal products. The petitioners contend that the ban violates citizens' fundamental rights and undermines established certification processes, arguing that it is a misconceived action causing chaos for retailers and affecting legitimate trade practices.
Although initially reluctant to exercise its Article 32 jurisdiction to hear the challenge against this ban, the top court was persuaded to issue notice in the petitions earlier this January, with the petitioners' counsel citing the 'pan-India ramifications' of the halal ban and its impact on inter-state trade and commerce. Although the bench sought the Uttar Pradesh government's response to the pleas, it refused to issue a stay on coercive steps under the impugned government notification.
During the hearing today, the counsel appearing for Jamiat, Advocate MR Shamshad, argued that despite the organisation having already joined the investigation and duly supplied all documents sought, the state government has summoned the president of the trust, asking him to be present in-person, without specifying what is needed from him.
Responding to this allegation, Justice Gavai said, "Show them that the Supreme Court is seized of the matter."
Shamshad replied, "We have pointed it out that the Supreme Court is seized of this matter. They want the president to be present. He is a former Rajya Sabha member, bearded man. The purpose is...there are TV cameras. This is completely extra-judicial. Your Lordships please protect him."
Ultimately, beside issuing notice, the bench also directed that no coercive steps will be taken against the petitioner-organisation and its office-bearers.
Background
On November 18, the Food Security and Drug Administration of the Uttar Pradesh Government banned the “manufacture, sale, storage and distribution of halal-certified products with immediate effect”, with the government reportedly justifying its decision by citing a complaint filed in Lucknow by a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) youth wing representative, accusing halal certifying bodies of issuing 'forged' certificates to boost sales among Muslims. Crucially, the ban applies solely to sales, manufacture, and storage within Uttar Pradesh and does not extend to export products. The notification reads -
"In compliance with Section 30(2)(d) of the Food Safety and Standards Act, in exercise of the authority vested in Section 30(2)(a) of the said Act, in view of public health, food with Halal certification is being banned within the limits of Uttar Pradesh. A ban is imposed with immediate effect on the manufacture, storage, distribution and sale of products (except food produced for export to the exporter.”
Responding to the outcry and potential disruptions caused by the ban, the state government later granted a 15-day grace period for retailers to withdraw halal-certified products from their shelves. Additionally, the government directed 92 state-based manufacturers receiving halal certification from non-certified organisations to recall and repackage their products.
Halal certificates, indicating that a product is permissible for consumption by followers of Islam, are issued by recognized bodies such as the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind's Halal Unit and the Halal Shariat Islamic Law Board. These bodies, accredited by the National Accreditation Board for Certification Bodies, have strongly criticised the government's decision. Not only this, the government's move has also led to a constitutional challenge before the Supreme Court by Halal India Private Limited and Jamiat Ulama-e-Maharashtra. This petitioners, in their writ petition, have sought legal intervention from the top court, citing the ban's unconstitutionality and its adverse consequences on trade practices, besides arguing that it infringes upon the fundamental right to choose food based on religious beliefs.
Case Details
Halal India Private Limited & Anr. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. | Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 690 of 2023 and connected matters.