Today, On 29th November, Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna requested the Sambhal court to postpone its hearing on the Shahi Jama Masjid survey case. The matter involves a dispute over the mosque and a survey proposed for its examination. The CJI’s request emphasizes the importance of careful judicial handling of sensitive issues. A revised hearing schedule is expected to follow.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court today instructed the management committee of the Shahi Idgah Masjid in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, to approach the Allahabad High Court to contest a trial court’s order that mandated a survey of the mosque.
This order stemmed from claims by Hindu petitioners asserting that a temple once stood at the site.
The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of maintaining peace and harmony, halting any further actions by the trial court until the High Court has had a chance to hear the case.
Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna stated ,
“Peace and harmony must be ensured. We will keep this pending. We do not want anything to happen. We have to be absolutely neutral and ensure that nothing untoward happens,”
The court also indicated that the trial court hearing scheduled for January 8 would be postponed until the High Court reviews the matter.
Earlier this week, violence erupted in Sambhal during the court-ordered survey of the mosque, resulting in clashes between locals and police, with several fatalities reported. The unrest began when a crowd gathered near the mosque as a survey team, led by an “Advocate Commissioner,” commenced its work.
![[BREAKING] Sambhal Mosque Plea Against Survey Order | "Please see that peace and harmony is maintained. We have to be absolutely neutral.": CJI Khanna](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/image-123.png?resize=820%2C482&ssl=1)
The crowd, which grew to nearly a thousand people, attempted to block the police from entering the mosque. Some individuals in the crowd threw stones at the police, and more than ten vehicles were set on fire. In response, police deployed tear gas, leading to casualties and injuries among both civilians and over 30 police personnel. Security measures in Sambhal were heightened in anticipation of Friday prayers and the submission of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) report to the trial court.
The controversy began with a petition filed by advocate Vishnu Shanker Jain and others, who are also involved in the Gyanvapi Mosque and Krishna Janmabhoomi disputes. Jain claimed that the Jama Masjid was constructed on the remnants of a temple dedicated to Lord Kalki, which was allegedly destroyed during Babur’s invasion in 1526-27. The petitioners refer to historical texts such as “Baburnamah” and “Ain-e-Akbari,” which document the temple’s destruction.
According to the petition, the temple was originally built by the Hindu figure Vishwakarma at the dawn of creation. It alleges that Babur’s forces partially destroyed the temple and converted it into a mosque to assert Islamic dominance. The petitioners also criticized the ASI for not taking charge of the site, which is protected under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act of 1958.
They called for unrestricted access to the mosque for Hindus, claiming that their right to worship was being unlawfully denied.
In response to the petition, the court ordered a survey of the mosque on November 19, 2024. Advocate Commissioner Ramesh Raghav, along with the district administration and police, conducted the survey that same day. This swift action faced criticism for potential judicial overreach and procedural irregularities.
The Muslim community, including the Jama Masjid management committee, strongly opposed the survey, citing the Places of Worship Act of 1991, which prohibits any alteration to the status of religious sites as they existed on August 15, 1947. Ziaur Rehman Barq, the Samajwadi Party MP from Sambhal, condemned the move as an attempt to disrupt communal harmony.
Key Arguments in the Supreme Court Petition
- Violation of the Places of Worship Act, 1991: The petition asserts that the trial court’s order contravenes the law, which prohibits the alteration of the religious character of places of worship as they stood on August 15, 1947.
- Protected Monument: The committee claims that the mosque is an ancient structure protected under the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), making any such interference unjustifiable.
- Pattern of Belated Claims: The Masjid Committee highlighted an emerging pattern of delayed and speculative claims targeting mosques, accompanied by judicial orders for surveys that risk inflaming communal passions.
- Threat to Communal Harmony: The committee warned that such actions could erode India’s secular framework and lead to widespread law and order problems.
- Lack of Due Process: It was argued that the trial court erred in proceeding ex-parte without hearing the mosque’s side, violating principles of natural justice.
The Masjid Committee has requested the Supreme Court to:
- Set aside the trial court’s survey order.
- Issue guidelines preventing routine surveys in religious disputes without adequate hearings.
- Direct authorities to ensure no further escalation of violence in the area.
Read Also: Sambhal Mosque Dispute Reaches Supreme Court | CJI Led Bench To Hear Tomorrow!
This case is being closely monitored as it touches upon several sensitive issues, including communal harmony, the legal sanctity of the Places of Worship Act, and the protection of historical monuments. Experts believe the outcome could set an important precedent in handling similar disputes across the country.
The suit filed by individuals who alleged that the Shahi Jama Masjid constructed after demolishing a temple. These claims mirror several other legal battles over historical religious structures, reflecting deep-seated tensions. The Supreme Court’s decision in this case could redefine the judiciary’s approach to resolving disputes involving places of worship.
The Supreme Court’s ruling was in response to a petition submitted by the Sambhal Shahi Jama Masjid Committee, which contested a trial court order that authorized a survey of the mosque. This trial court decision was based on assertions that the mosque was constructed by Mughal emperor Babur in 1526 after the demolition of an existing temple on the site.