Click the Play button to listen to article

The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday heard detailed submissions from the Airports Authority of India (AAI) opposing interim permission to resume prayers at the Bankra Mosque located within the Kolkata airport premises, with the airport authorities contending that national and aviation security concerns justified restricting access to the mosque.

Justice Krishna Rao was hearing a petition filed by the Bankra Masjid Committee challenging the suspension of prayers at the mosque and seeking permission for worship to resume.

Appearing for the AAI, Senior Advocate SN Mookherjee submitted that the mosque is situated on public land which had already been acquired for airport-related purposes and that offering Namaz does not require access to a particular mosque.

“Airport is public land. It is not mandatory to go to a mosque for Namaz. Namaz can be offered anywhere,” the counsel submitted.

He further argued that the land had been acquired decades ago for the expansion of the airport and referred to a notification dated February 7, 1961. According to the AAI's submissions, the land was acquired from local residents and compensation had also been paid in relation to the mosque.

The Court sought clarification from the AAI's counsel regarding the original owners of the land. In response, Mukherjee submitted that the property had been acquired from local residents and that rehabilitation and compensation had been provided.

The AAI counsel further submitted that the right to practise religion did not confer a right to insist upon practising it at a particular location, particularly where national security was involved.

He also told the Court that the decision to restrict access to the mosque was not taken abruptly.

According to the submissions, Civil Aviation authorities had written to the airport on May 13, 2026 regarding security deficiencies. A meeting of stakeholders was subsequently held on May 23, where members of the Bankra Mosque Committee were also present.

The AAI submitted that concerns had arisen regarding aviation security and the movement of people in the airport area, including issues affecting aircraft operations. It was argued that the decision to stop access through the airport gate was taken after considering the views of the stakeholders.

“It was not done overnight. The views of all stakeholders were heard. National and aviation security are involved,” the counsel submitted, opposing any interim order in favour of the petitioners.

The AAI also argued that acquisition of religious structures for larger public purposes was legally permissible, pointing to instances where temples and churches had been affected by land acquisition for national highways.

The Centre, represented by Additional Solicitor General Dhiraj Trivedi, also opposed interim relief.

The ASG submitted that the Constitution does not provide a separate exemption to a mosque from land acquisition and contended that the location of the mosque, near the airport runway, raised serious security concerns.

He further referred to a report of the Prime Minister's Office from 2019, submitting that expansion of the airport would not be possible if the mosque continued to remain at its present location.

The Centre also submitted that the structure did not have heritage status and argued that fundamental rights could not be considered in isolation from public safety and national security requirements at an airport.

The petitioners, however, maintained that prayers had been offered at the mosque for around 136 years without any security-related incident. Their counsel submitted that devotees had earlier been subjected to security checks before being taken to the mosque for prayers.

The petitioners are challenging the decision to stop prayers at the mosque and have sought interim permission to resume worship pending adjudication of the main petition.

The dispute arose after access to the mosque was restricted from July 11, 2026. The petition was subsequently filed before the High Court challenging the restriction. Earlier, the Court had declined to grant interim permission for prayers after the authorities raised national security and aviation security concerns.

The matter is next listed for hearing on October 9.

Tags: