New Delhi, The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a plea searching for a route to the Centre to deliver the mortal stays of an India-born Pakistani Sufi saint, who died in Bangladesh in 2022, for re-burial in Prayagraj to honour his want.

The plea referred to the need executed by Hazrat Shah Muhammad Abdul Muqtadir Shah Masood Ahmad, a former native of Allahabad, now Prayagraj, who acquired Pakistani citizenship in 1992, that his mortal stays be interred on the Dargah within the Uttar Pradesh metropolis which he presided over.

“He was a Pakistani citizen. How can you expect the Union of India to bring his mortal remains for re-burial in India. There is no such right whose enforcement can be sought,” the highest courtroom stated whereas rejecting the plea filed by Dargah Hazrat Mulla Syed of Prayagraj.

“We also have to go by the principles of enforcement of constitutional rights,” the bench, comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra stated, including had he been an Indian citizen the plea would have been taken observe of.

The counsel, who appeared for the Dargah, stated Ahmad had no household in Pakistan and, furthermore, the Sufi saint was the ‘Sajjada Nasheen’ of the shrine.

In Sufi custom, a Sajjada Nasheen is a successor of a Sufi saint who presides over a shrine.

The bench made it clear that there isn’t any constitutionally enforceable proper to hunt transportation of the Sufi saint’s mortal stays as he was a Pakistani citizen.

“He was elected as the Sajjada Nasheen of the shrine at Dargah Hazrat Mulla Syed Mohammad Shah in 2008 in Prayagraj. He executed his will in 2021 expressing a desire to be buried in the shrine. He died in Dhaka where he was buried. There are difficulties in entertaining such a petition.

“Hazrat Shah was a Pakistani citizen and had no constitutional proper… the sensible difficulties associated to exhumation. As a matter of first precept, it might not be proper for this courtroom to direct the transportation of the mortal stays of a citizen of a overseas state to India,” the bench stated.

This article was generated from an automatic information company feed with out modifications to textual content.