The Gujarat government presented its case before Justice Nisha M Thakor, arguing that the 500‑metre restriction around Somnath Temple—introduced in August—cannot be overridden by commercial interests. It cited a past nine‑month footfall of 1.16 crore devotees and pointed out that the ban covers six specific zones where non‑veg sale and storage are prohibited, while allowing vegetarian services to continue.
The prohibition mirrors similar measures at Rishikesh, Haridwar, Amritsar and Mathura‑Vrindavan, where authorities have deemed non‑vegetarian food unsuitable for pilgrim routes. Gujarat officials said the temple’s religious, historical and spiritual significance demands such restraint, echoing a broader pattern of pilgrimage‑site regulation across India.
Six restaurant owners, each holding valid licences for decades, have filed a petition claiming the ban violates Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. Their establishments, located beyond the temple’s immediate periphery, argue that the district magistrate exceeded his authority by imposing a permanent prohibition on lawful business. “We were forced to shut our doors with no clear justification,” one owner told reporters.
In the courtroom, the Gujarat High Court will weigh the state’s religious arguments against the entrepreneurs’ trade rights. The bench has scheduled a follow‑up hearing for June 5, after which a judgment will be delivered. For the owners, the outcome could mean the restoration of their kitchens or the affirmation of a stringent moral code.
Across the street, Chef Rajesh Sharma, who runs a 30‑year‑old eatery, says the ban has slashed his income by 40% and left dozens of local workers job‑less. His plight underscores the human cost of the debate, as families struggle to balance faith and livelihood.
The court’s decision will set a precedent for how religious sanctity and commercial freedom coexist in India’s bustling pilgrimage hubs.