Supreme Court Rejects Waqf Board’s Claim Over Delhi Gurdwara: "You Should Relinquish The Claim"

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

Today, On 4th June, The Supreme Court rejected the Delhi Waqf Board’s claim over a Delhi Gurdwara, stating, “You should relinquish the claim.” The Board had said the mosque, “Masjid Takia Babbar Shah,” existed since time immemorial for religious use.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court dismissed the Delhi Waqf Board’s claim over a premises currently being used as a Gurdwara.

The bench, consisting of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, rejected the Waqf Board’s appeal against a 2010 decision by the Delhi High Court.

Also Read: Delhi High Court Finds Delhi Gurdwara Management Committee in Contempt for Failure to Pay School Staff Despite Sikhism’s Emphasis on Generosity

Justice Sharma remarked that the Board should have voluntarily renounced its claim. In response, Senior Advocate Sanjoy Ghose, representing the Board, noted that lower courts had acknowledged the presence of a mosque but now recognized that “some kind of gurdwara is there.”

Before dismissing the appeal, The Court clarified,

“Not some kind of. A proper functioning gurudwara. Once there is a Gurudwara let it be. A religious structure is already functioning there. You should yourself relinquish that claim you see,”

Also Read: Who Owns the Taj Mahal? | Inside the Waqf Board Controversy

According to the Waqf Board, the mosque in question, located in Shahdara, was identified as “Masjid Takia Babbar Shah.”

The Board asserted that this mosque had existed for a long time and was intended for religious use.

However, the opposing party contended that the property was not wakf property, as the owner, Mohd Ahsaan, had sold it to him in 1953.

The Delhi High Court had ruled in favor of this defendant.

Also Read: “Waqf Law Itself was a Mistake & Removing it Entirely Would Be Ideal”: Union Minister Pralhad Joshi

The High Court stated,

“Defendant was admittedly in occupation of this property since 1947-48. It is also true that the defendant was not able to adduce any document of title to evidence the purchase of this property, yet this does not in any manner benefit the plaintiff who has to establish his own case and prove it to enable him to obtain a decree of possession.”

A civil appeal filed against a 2011 judgment of the Delhi High Court that had allowed the Waqf Board’s claim.

The Sikh Gurdwara Management had challenged that decision, arguing that the land had always been used as a Gurdwara and had no connection to any Waqf property.

Case Title: DELHI WAKF BOARD Versus HIRA SINGH (D) THR.LR. AMARJIT SINGH, C.A. No. 2985/2012