Police force should have secular image; no right under Article 25 for police personnel to keep a beard: Allahabad High Court

There is no fundamental right under Article 25 for a police force personnel to keep a beard, the Allahabad High Court recently ruled (Mohd. Farman v. State of UP).

. Single judge Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan , dismissed the petition filed by one Mohd. Farman, a constable with Uttar Pradesh Police, who claimed that he has a fundamental right to keep a beard despite specific direction issued to the contrary by the superior authority.

"Article 25 guarantees freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion, therefore, having beard by a member of disciplined force may not be protected under Article 25 of the Constitution of India, inasmuch as, Article 25 of the Constitution of India does not confer absolute right in this regard, all the rights have to be viewed in the context and letter and spirit in which they have framed under the Constitution," the Court said.

As a matter of fact, rights guaranteed under Article 25 of the Constitution of India have inbuilt restrictions, the Court added.

Pertinently, the Court also held that police force has to be a disciplined force and being a law enforcing agency, it is necessary that such force must have secular image which strengthens national integration.

. Farman had filed two petitions before the High Court. By way of his first writ petition, Farman assailed a circular dated October 26, 2020 issued by the Director General of Police, UP laying down the guidelines regarding wearing proper uniform and proper appearance warranted for the members of the force.

The second petition challenged a suspension order dated November 5, 2020 passed by Deputy Inspector General of Police, Ayodhya by which Farman was placed under suspension in contemplation of departmental inquiry for the reason that despite being the member of disciplined force, he was maintaining a beard.

. Along with the second petition, he also challenged the charge-sheet dated July 29, 2021 issued by Superintendent of Police (Rural Area), Ayodhya against him.

. Farman;s counsel, advocate Amit Bose referred to the Supreme Court judgment in Bijoe Emmanuel and others vs. State of Kerala and submitted that the court held that even if any student does sing National Anthem in school prayer due to their religious belief, such right is protected under Article 25 of the Constitution of India.

"Therefore, rejecting the request of the petitioner for maintaining beard in the light of circular dated October 26, 2020 is violative of Article 25 of the Constitution of India," he added.

Bose also assailed the charge-sheet, submitting that the conduct of the petitioner not cutting his beard despite the specific direction being issued by the superior authority does not come within the purview of misconduct, therefore, no charge-sheet should have been issued against the petitioner to conduct the departmental inquiry.

. On the other had, Additional Chief Standing Counsel, Vivek Kumar Shukla submitted that the charge-sheet should not be interfered by the Court.

. After considering the submission and records of the case, the Court held that a member of a disciplined force must strictly follow the executive orders or circulars or instructions issued by the department or by the higher authority of the department as those executive orders are as good as service condition.

"As a matter of fact such executive intimation/order has been issued to maintain the discipline in the force directing to keep the appearance and uniform befitting for the members of disciplined force. Further, police force has to be a disciplined force and being a law enforcing agency, it is necessary that such force must have secular image which strengthen the countenance of national integration," the Court said.

Regarding the action initiated against the petitioner, the Court held that non-cutting of beard amounts to violation of the circular issued by higher officials amounts to misdemeanour.

"Non-cutting the beard despite making the petitioner aware by the In-charge Station House Officer of police station Khandasa when the petitioner was posted as constable to the effect that the police personnel may not have beard as it is a violation of direction/circular being issued by the higher officials is not only a wrong behaviour but the same is misdemeanor, misdeed and delinquency of the petitioner," the order said.

The Court, therefore, directed that the inquiry officer shall conduct and conclude the departmental inquiry strictly in accordance with law, following the principles of natural justice preferably within a period of three months.

" No interference should be done, inasmuch as, maintaining and wearing a proper uniform as well as maintaining physical appearance is one of the first and foremost requirement of the members of a disciplined force ," the Court emphasised.

. [Read order]

Police force should have secular image; no right under Article 25 for police personnel to keep a beard: Allahabad High Court

Areeb Uddin Ahmed

Related Stories