<p>New Delhi: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/supreme-court">Supreme Court</a> on Monday upheld a Madras High Court’s order prohibiting animal sacrifice and granting Muslim devotees limited rights to prayers over a dargah on the Thiruparankundram hills in Tamil Nadu’s Madurai.</p><p>A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and P B Varale declined to interfere with the October 2025 order of the High Court, finding it as balanced one.</p><p>Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioner, M Imam Hussain, said there had never been a law and order problem in the area, to which the bench said that there would not have been a peace committee meeting in the absence of such a problem. </p>.Unnao rape case: No relief for Kuldeep Singh Sengar as Supreme Court refuses to suspend sentence .<p>The petitioner contended the High Court's orders were arbitrary and contrary to Article 25 of the Constitution.</p><p>The bench, however, said, “It seems to be a very balanced order. We do not propose to interfere with the order. Without expressing any opinion on the rights of the parties, the impugned order stands upheld.” </p><p>The High Court had permitted prayers and gatherings in the Nellithoppu area during Bakrid and Ramzan, subject to the condition that it did not affect the traditional footsteps belonging to the Subramaniya Swamy temple.</p><p>It had, however, said that animal sacrifice, cooking, carrying and serving of non-vegetarian food cannot be permitted until a decision was made by the competent civil court. </p><p>The High Court had previously so allowed the lighting of a lamp at a deepathoon.</p>
<p>New Delhi: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/supreme-court">Supreme Court</a> on Monday upheld a Madras High Court’s order prohibiting animal sacrifice and granting Muslim devotees limited rights to prayers over a dargah on the Thiruparankundram hills in Tamil Nadu’s Madurai.</p><p>A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and P B Varale declined to interfere with the October 2025 order of the High Court, finding it as balanced one.</p><p>Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioner, M Imam Hussain, said there had never been a law and order problem in the area, to which the bench said that there would not have been a peace committee meeting in the absence of such a problem. </p>.Unnao rape case: No relief for Kuldeep Singh Sengar as Supreme Court refuses to suspend sentence .<p>The petitioner contended the High Court's orders were arbitrary and contrary to Article 25 of the Constitution.</p><p>The bench, however, said, “It seems to be a very balanced order. We do not propose to interfere with the order. Without expressing any opinion on the rights of the parties, the impugned order stands upheld.” </p><p>The High Court had permitted prayers and gatherings in the Nellithoppu area during Bakrid and Ramzan, subject to the condition that it did not affect the traditional footsteps belonging to the Subramaniya Swamy temple.</p><p>It had, however, said that animal sacrifice, cooking, carrying and serving of non-vegetarian food cannot be permitted until a decision was made by the competent civil court. </p><p>The High Court had previously so allowed the lighting of a lamp at a deepathoon.</p>