National 7 of 11
National Judgment Law & Courts Polity & Governance

Gujarat High Court division bench stays a single judge order that had quashed a food restriction notification near Somnath

A division bench of the Gujarat High Court has stayed a single judge order that had quashed a District Magistrate's notification restricting non-vegetarian food on seven public routes and within 500 metres of the Somnath temple. The notification had been issued under Section 33(1)(w) of the Gujarat Police Act, 1951. Justice Nisha M. Thakore held that the provision covers only places of public entertainment and that the phrase eating house had been removed from that definition by a 2018 amendment, so the power could not be used to regulate what a restaurant serves. She also held that the restriction was disproportionate and infringed the right to carry on trade under Article 19(1)(g), and that eating or not displaying such food is not an essential religious practice under Article 25. The State appealed the same evening and the division bench, headed by Acting Chief Justice Manash Ranjan Pathak, stayed the order and kept the notification in force until the next hearing.

Provision used: Section 33(1)(w), Gujarat Police Act, 1951 Restricted zone: Seven public routes and 500 metres around the temple Next hearing: 25 November 2026
Why it matters for exams: Article 19(1)(g) on freedom of trade and Article 25 on essential religious practice, read with a State Police Act power, is a classic law question.
Kerala PSCUPSC
30 October 2026 Source: LiveLaw

In plain words

LPA Letters Patent Appeal — An appeal from a single judge of a High Court to a division bench of the same court.

On a phone, swipe left or right to move between stories.