Uttarakhand Madrasa Education Board Chairman Mufti Shamoon Qasmi has supported Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath’s call against offering namaz on public roads, arguing that public thoroughfares must remain open for commuters, ambulances and emergency services.
Qasmi’s remarks, made in Dehradun on Tuesday, placed him among the prominent Muslim public figures backing the Uttar Pradesh government’s position that religious activity should not obstruct civic movement. He said roads were meant for public passage and that blocking them for prayers could create avoidable risks for people needing urgent medical or other emergency assistance.
“What CM Yogi Adityanath has said is something I understand because he is a saint,” Qasmi said, adding that a person with religious learning should recognise the importance of public convenience. He said namaz should be offered in mosques or designated spaces, not on roads, and argued that obstructing public routes in the name of worship did not conform to the spirit of Islam.
The comments followed Adityanath’s statement on Monday that namaz would not be allowed on roads in Uttar Pradesh. The Chief Minister said public roads were for traffic and daily movement, not for gatherings that prevent others from using civic infrastructure. He suggested that worshippers could organise prayers in shifts where space was limited, instead of occupying public streets.
Adityanath’s remarks have triggered a wider political and social debate over the regulation of religious gatherings in public places. Supporters of the position say the issue is one of public order, traffic management and equal enforcement of civic rules. Critics contend that such statements can acquire communal overtones if they are applied selectively or framed in a way that targets a particular community.
Qasmi sought to present the matter as an administrative and religious question rather than a communal dispute. He said those claiming to speak for Muslims often failed to explain Islamic principles properly, adding that public inconvenience should not be caused by any religious activity. His emphasis on emergency access, especially the possibility of an ambulance being delayed, gave the debate a civic-safety dimension.
Uttar Pradesh has, for several years, maintained a strict position on public religious gatherings that obstruct roads, particularly during major festivals and Friday prayers. State authorities have previously directed district administrations to ensure that religious observances are held within designated premises or approved locations. The policy has been defended as necessary to prevent traffic disruption, crowding and law-and-order issues.
The debate has also revived questions about how states balance freedom of religion with the rights of citizens to access public infrastructure. Courts have generally held that religious freedom is subject to public order, morality and health, while civic authorities retain powers to regulate the use of roads, parks and public spaces. At the same time, enforcement remains sensitive in a country where religious processions, festivals, congregational prayers and political gatherings frequently spill into public areas.
Qasmi’s intervention carries significance because he heads a madrasa education body in a state where madrasa reforms and minority education have become politically visible subjects. Uttarakhand has been moving to bring madrasa education more closely into the mainstream curriculum, with greater emphasis on modern subjects alongside religious instruction. His public support for Adityanath’s position is likely to be cited by those arguing that restrictions on roadside prayers can be defended from within the community as well.
Opposition voices are expected to scrutinise whether similar standards are applied to all religious events that occupy public roads. Large processions, festival gatherings and political rallies often require police deployment, traffic diversions and administrative permissions. The credibility of any policy restricting public worship will depend on whether it is implemented consistently across communities and occasions.
The political backdrop is also important. Adityanath has built a reputation for assertive law-and-order governance in Uttar Pradesh, and his remarks on namaz fit into a broader administrative narrative that prioritises discipline in public spaces. His critics, however, argue that his language can deepen mistrust among minorities, particularly when statements on religious practice are delivered with warnings of stronger action.
