The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday refused to interfere with an inquiry initiated by the Uttar Pradesh Anti Terrorist Squad (ATS) into the alleged receipt of foreign funds by more than four thousand unaided madrasas operating in the state. The matter came before a division bench comprising Justice Neeraj Tiwari and Justice Vivek Saran after the Madrasa Management Committee together with the Teachers’ Association, Madrasas Arabia filed a petition seeking to quash the government order dated 9 December 2025 that directed the ATS to conduct the investigation.
The petitioners contended that two earlier inquiries had already been undertaken on substantially similar grounds and that no adverse findings had emerged from those proceedings. They argued that the present probe was therefore repetitive and amounted to a campaign of harassment against the institutions they represent. In support of this position, the petitioners submitted that the inquiry lacked a legitimate basis and was liable to be set aside as an abuse of process.
Representing the State, Additional Advocate General Manish Goel, assisted by Advocate AK Goel, countered that the inquiry was not confined to the petitioners alone but extended to approximately four thousand madrasas across Uttar Pradesh. He submitted that the action was predicated on intelligence inputs received from various sources which indicated the construction of large‑scale religious institutions without clear financial documentation or verifiable income streams. The State’s counsel emphasized that the proceeding was not coercive in nature and that the petitioners retained the liberty to file a reply before the Inquiry Committee.
After hearing the arguments, the bench observed that the conduct of the inquiry could not be characterised as a coercive action against the petitioners. Consequently, the Court expressed its unwillingness to entertain the petition at that stage. The bench, however, clarified that the petitioners remained at liberty to submit a response before the Inquiry Committee and that any such response would be duly considered by the authorities.
The Court’s order noted that the investigation had been triggered following intelligence reports alleging the receipt of foreign funding by the madrasas. The inputs highlighted the establishment of expansive institutions in multiple locations where the sources of finance remained obscure and undocumented. The bench did not delve into the merits of the allegations but confined its decision to the procedural question of whether an interim stay was warranted.
In a related pronouncement delivered earlier in January 2026, the same High Court had held that no statutory provision empowers the District Minority Welfare Officer to order the closure of an unrecognised madrasa in Uttar Pradesh. That precedent was referenced by the petitioners during the hearing, although the bench did not rely on it for the present determination.
Senior Counsel VK Singh, assisted by Advocate Mohd. Ali Ausaf, appeared on behalf of the petitioners. The case is cited as Committee Of Management And Another vs State of UP and 5 others 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 348.
The dismissal of the petition allows the ATS probe to continue unimpeded. The bench’s observation that the inquiry is not coercive preserves the petitioners’ opportunity to present their case before the Inquiry Committee, thereby maintaining a balance between investigative authority and the right to be heard. The decision underscores the Court’s reluctance to intervene in preliminary investigative steps unless a clear demonstration of coercive or mala fide intent is established.