Puja Pandals On Public Roads Don't Infringe Right To Free Movement If Roads Are Not Completely Blocked: Orissa High Court

Balancing the right to religion of a community and the fundamental right of movement of individual citizens, the Bench of Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo observed–

“We are conscious that right to free movement not only originates from Article 19 but also a facet of life under Article 21 of the Constitution yet, an individual cannot assert that the same is completely hindered in the event it is found that taking into account the larger public interest, the necessary permission and/or license is granted by the State to organize such festivals across the country. The same does not hinder nor infringe any right provided they have a right of free access but in a restrictive manner.”

The petitioner Sarat Kumar Gajendra approached the High Court by filing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) accusing that temporary pandals are erected for worshipping Lord Ganesh and Goddess Durga at a meagre distance of 50 metres from his house, which completely block the road making the petitioner inaccessible to his own house for some days every year.

Sensing the gravity of the allegations, the Court requisitioned response from the State. The State outrightly denied the claim of complete blockade and submitted that a 22 feet passage is left for commutation of the vehicles, ensuring the uninterrupted movement.

The Court ingeminated the “ardent duty” of the State to see that there is no complete obstruction in a restrictive movement of the vehicles, at least the persons residing in the locality get an access for ingress and egress. However, the Court was loath to entertain the prayer for blanket stoppage of religious rituals.

The Bench, speaking through the Chief Justice, made it clear that when the fundamental rights of a community are pitted against the rights of an individual, the latter has to make way for the former.

“Often question arises when the fundamental rights guaranteed to each and every individual as a citizen of the country is pitted against the fundamental rights enjoined by a large section of the society. There is no scintilla of doubt in our mind that if the fundamental right of a person is overlapping the fundamental rights of a large section of the society, the law respects the larger interest over an individual interest.”

Nevertheless, a harmonious equilibrium has to be ensured, the Court opined, so as to not deprive local people of access to their residences, or movement of emergency vehicles.

“Even if those festivals are performed on a public place, the State must ensure that the movement of public to their respective places of residence is not hindered or completely blocked nor the Court would conceive of that there is no access provided which would have a larger cascading effect in case of emergent situations. Even if the pandals are constructed on a public place, there should be adequate space left for the movement of the vehicles or at least the movement of an ambulance and/or a fire engine in case of any emergency to avoid any public disorder or a disharmony into a large section of the society.”

Accordingly, the petition was disposed of.

Date of Judgment: October 16, 2026

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. Sarat Kumar Gajendra, Petitioner-in-Person; Mr. Laxman Pradhan, Advocate

Counsel for the Opposite Parties: Mr. Debasish Tripathy, Addl. Govt. Advocate; Mr. P.K. Ray, Senior Advocate