No Law Bars Conducting Prayer Meeting Inside One's Home, Permission From Authority Not Required: Chhattisgarh High Court
The Chhattisgarh High Court recently observed that there is no law restraining any one from organizing prayer meeting in their dwelling house and thus no prior permission is needed from any authority for conducting such a prayer meeting if it is organized without violating any law.
In doing so the court granted relief to two persons who had moved the high court challenging notices issued by the Police restraining them from oragnizing prayer meetings for Christians inside their own dwelling home.
The court was hearing a plea challenging notices passed by Police Station Nawagarh restraining them from conducting prayer meeting inside their dwelling house. The plea further sought direction to the State not to interfere in the "legal religious prayer meeting held by the petitioner and other believers of Christian religion on Sundays and any special occasions".
Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi in his order said:
"The petitioners are registered owner of said lands where they used to organize 'Prayer Meeting' of the followers of Christianity at their dwelling house since 2016. There is no such law restraining any persons to organize prayer/ prayer meeting in their dwelling house. Further, there is no need to get prior permission from any authority for conducting prayer / prayer meeting, if the same is organized without violating any law. If there is any nuisance caused due to noise pollution or situation of law & order arises, then it is always open for the Authorities to take necessary action under the provisions of the relevant statutes. Consequently, the respondents / police authorities are directed not to interfere with the civil rights of the petitioners and also shall not harass them under the guise of enquiry or so".
The petitioners claimed that they are recorded owners of a plot in village Godhna, Tahsil & Police Station Nawagarh, District Janjgir-Champa which are adjacent lands. Both the petitioners, who are relatives, had constructed a hall on the first floor of their house where they used to orgarnize prayer meeting of the believers of Christianity since 2016.
It was submitted that on account of aforesaid activity of the petitioners, respondent No. 7 - Station House Officer, Police Station – Nawagarh, Distt. Janjgir-Champa was harrassing the petitioners by serving notices under Section 94 BNSS.
It was submitted that while organizing such prayer meetings, no nuisance or illegal activity was conducted by the petitioners. But despite this, the SHO had issued notices dated 18.10.2025, 22.11.2025 and 01.02.2026 to the petitioners to restrain them from conducting prayer meeting in their dwelling house. It was contended that earlier Gram Panchayat Godhna, Tahsil & Police Station – Nawagarh had issued “No Objection Certificate” in favour of the petitioners to organize prayer meeting but the same had been recalled by the Gram Panchayat "under pressure".
The petition sought that the police notices be quashed and the authorities be restrained from raising "objection or harrassing" the petitioners on account of aforesaid 'Prayer Meeting' organized by them in their personal dwelling house.
They had sought a direction to the authorities to protect the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India.
Meanwhile the State contended that there are criminal cases registered against the petitioners and they were also remained in jail. It was submitted that the petitioners have never sought any prior permission from the competent authority to organize the prayer meeting in their dwelling house, therefore, the aforesaid notices had been issued by the Police Authority.
Noting that the petitioners were the registered owners of the land in question and were organizing Prayer Meetings for Christians at their dwelling house since 2016 and that there was no law restraining persons to organize prayer meeting in their dwelling house, the court quashed the notices issued by the police.
The court however said that if any nuisance is caused due to noise pollution or a law and order situation arises, then it is always open for the authorities to take necessary action under the relevant law.
The court allowed the petition to the aforementioned extent.
Recently the Allahabad High Court had observed that Article 25 of the Constitution of India protects the right to congregate for worship for every religious denomination in the country, but it does not accord protection to incitement of one faith by another in the garb of prayer. At the same time, the Court made it clear that there can be no impediment or embargo with regard to prayers or religious functions being conducted within the private premises of a person, irrespective of the denomination of faith he belongs to.
The court said this while considering a petition alleging that the state administration was preventing the petitioner from performing Namaz at a site where he claimed a mosque existed. It was the petitioner's case was that during Ramzan, a large number of persons wish to come and pray, and that there can be no constraint on the number of worshipers who may worship at a given point of time.
Meanwhile last year, the Madras High Court had reteriated that a house cannot be converted into a prayer hall without necessary permission from the authorities. In this case the petitioner, a pastor had submitted that he was running a trust established in 2007. He submitted that the property was purchased in 2023 and regular prayer meetings were held in the property ever since. While so, based on a complaint, an enquiry was conducted by the Inspector of Police. Though the pastor submitted an application for building permission and plan approval for construction of church, the same was rejected by the district collector. Meanwhile, the Tahsildar issued a notice asking the petitioner to close down the prayer hall in 10 days. The petitioner had moved the high court challenging the notice.
The high court referred to a coordinate bench's decision in T. Wilson v. District Collector, Kanyakumari Dist and Ors. (2021) where it was held that a religious right cannot be claimed to be absolute and prayer meetings attended by huge crowds would require obtaining necessary permission under the relevant rules.
Case title: Badri Prasad Sahu & Anr. v/s State Of Chhattisgarh & Ors.
WPC No. 1281 of 2026