'Closure Of One Gate Is Not Obstruction': MP High Court Junks PIL For Access To Religious Sites In Khandwa District Hospital

The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Wednesday (July 02) dismissed a public interest litigation seeking directions to the Government District Hospital in Khandwa to allow open access to the general public to visit Hazrat Syed Chand Shah Wali Mazad and a Shiv Temple, which are situated within the hospital premises. 

The division bench of Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf observed that only one gate was closed and that the general public was free to visit the religious sites using the alternate route provided by the hospital administration.

"Come from the other route. Why should they open the hospital to the public? It is done for the safety and security of the hospital. Your way to the temple and mazar is not blocked; if you want to visit the religious places, use the other gate. Your access is not blocked; you will just have to use the longer route. You cannot claim such averments merely because that one gate, which is open, is inconvenient"

The petitioner, represented by Advocate Nitin Jain, submitted that until December 2024, all gates of the hospital remained open to the general public, enabling access to these religious sites. However, the petitioner asserted that at present, only one gate remained open, requiring the general public to pass through the hospital compound, thereby limiting their access to these religious sites. 

The plea averred that such 'arbitrary closure' of the main gate of the public road had caused serious hardship and violated fundamental rights of devotees and common citizens, by compelling them to take the longer route.

The State, however, submitted that access to the religious places has not been blocked. It asserted that no such blockade had been imposed and clarified that only one of the hospital gates had been closed. 

Rejecting the petitioner's argument that the public was being unduly restricted from visiting the religious sites, the court held:

"The land belongs to the hospital. Any individual visiting the hospital may visit the religious site located therein. The hospital is not obligated to allow unrestricted public access to its premises". 

The division bench observed that the public's route to the temple and the Mazar has not been entirely blocked. The court further noted: "People visiting the hospital within the hospital premises can visit the religious sites. Anyone within the hospital compound will be able to access Mazar".

Thus, the court, while disposing of the petition, passed the following order:

"The petitioner has filed the present petition alleging that the respondent hospital has blocked access to Hazrat Syed Chand Wali Mazad and a Shiv Temple, located within the premises of the Government Hospital. Government Advocate appearing for the State submitted that the access had not been blocked and referred to paragraph 5 of the petition itself, which states that one gate had been closed, thereby requiring the public to take a longer alternative route. It was submitted that access to a religious place had not been prohibited or obstructed. The gate had been closed purely for security and administrative purposes. Access to the temple and the Mazar remains open to the general public. In view of the above statements, no further directions are warranted. The petition stands disposed of accordingly". 

For Petitioner: Advocates Nitin Jain, Shimla Jain, Akash Singhaim, Abhay Sohagaura, Manish Jain, Ashish Rawat and Ankita Agrawal

Case Title: Ayyub Lala v State of MP (WRIT PETITION (WP) 22263/2025)