' The petitioner has sought for a direction in this writ petition that the respondents be ordered to add in the licence the Namaz programme and Namaz timings in the route of the procession which is yet to be issued on 9th Muharram of this year to the petitioner.
2. According to the averments in the writ petition, the petitioner is a licensee for Zuljinnah, Tabut, Mams etc., procession which is taken out from Aza Khana Pando Street, Krishan Nagar, on the 9th of Moharram for the last more than thirty years. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the procession, prayers timings occur and, therefore, the petitioner had on 26-9-1981 applied to the District Magistrate, Lahore, for adding the Namaz programme on the road during the said procession at Namaz time in the licence of this year which is yet to be issued.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that offering prayer timings is the fundamental religious right of a person or persons according to his or their faith and this being so, the respondents have no right to refuse to add the Namaz timings in the licence as it tantamounts to interference with a right of saying prayers in the procession. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that an application for adding the aforesaid condition has been made by way of abundant caution, inasmuch as, last year the processionists were offering Zuhur Namaz congregation but the police lathi-charged and tear-gased the processionists with the result that the entire procession was disturbed. It is, therefore, submitted that with a view to avoid likelihood of breach of peace, the present petition has been filed. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that it is a fundamental right of a person to offer prayer and that no permission is required to offer the same. He further submits that it is the duty of the administration to take adequate measures for protection of the processionists for observing their religious rites.
4. Sh. Riaz Ahmad, learned Advocate-General, has opposed the prayer made in the Writ petition on various grounds. Firstly, that the licence had already been granted to the petitioner and, therefore, the present writ petition has become infructuous. Secondly, the condition as prayed for was never granted earlier for the last thirty years according to petitioner himself. Thirdly, that no order of the Court is required for offering of prayers by the petitioner, which, admittedly, he is entitled to offer in accordance with his religious belief. Lastly, that if the Namaz is offered by the call of Azzan, and if it is before the Sunni Mosque, there is likelihood of breach of peace.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted in rebuttal that the processionists have no intention to offer prayer before the Sunni Mosque, and, therefore, the question of any breach of peace does not arise.
6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties. Offering Namaz is a command by God Almighty and no order is required from a Court in this regard. The petition is, therefore, misconceived. In any case, since a licence has already been issued to the petitioner according to the statement made by the learned Advocate-General, the present writ petition has become infructuous.
7. Be that as it may, I have no doubt in my mind that the administration shall not cause any hinderance or interference in the procession of the processionists on the occasion of 9th of Moharram for this year and shall take all possible measures to ensure the safety and protection of the rocessionists.
' With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.