Bhojshala complex dispute: SC to hear appeals against Madhya Pradesh HC verdict
New Delhi, July 13
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to list for hearing a batch of appeals filed by the Muslim side challenging the Madhya Pradesh High Court verdict, which held the disputed Bhojshala complex in Dhar district as a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati.
A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohna said it would list the matter soon, after senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, appearing for the Muslim appellants, sought urgent hearing.
Qazi Moinuddin, the mosque's caretaker and one of the intervenors in the case, and others have filed an appeal against the High Court order in the top court.
The High Court on May 15 had ruled that the disputed Bhojshala-Kamal Maula Mosque complex is a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati and also set aside an April 7, 2003, Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) order that had allowed the Muslim community to offer Friday prayers at the site.
The High Court had allowed the Muslim community to approach the State government for an allotment of separate land in the district for the construction of a mosque.
It had also said that the Centre and the ASI could decide the administration and management of the Bhojshala complex, a 11th-century protected monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
The High Court held that the religious character of the disputed complex was that of Bhojshala, a temple associated with Goddess Vagdevi Saraswati and linked to Parmar ruler Raja Bhoj, who is credited with turning Dhar into a centre of Sanskrit learning.
The site is claimed by the Hindu community as Bhojshala, a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati, while the Muslim side identifies it as the Kamal Maula Mosque.
After the order of the High Court, Muslim parties in the case approached the top court challenging the order. Anticipating a challenge to the verdict, Hindu parties have also filed caveats in the apex court, seeking that no order be passed on any appeal in the case without hearing them.
A Hindu group had approached the High Court in 2022 seeking a scientific survey to determine the religious character of Bhojshala. On March 11, 2024, the High Court ordered a survey between March 22 and June 30 at the one-acre site.
The ASI report of the survey concluded that the monument was built from the remains of earlier temples and that the existing mosque structure was erected centuries later, as evidenced by inscriptions, sculptural fragments, and architectural remains.
— ANI
Reader Comments
The High Court verdict seems fair - they acknowledged the temple's existence but also offered an alternative for the Muslim community to get land for a mosque. What more can you ask for? This constant litigation is draining our judiciary's time. Let's move forward with a practical solution.
As an outsider looking in, I find it fascinating how India handles such complex religious disputes through its legal system. The ASI report seems thorough - finding inscriptions and architectural evidence from earlier temples. But I wonder if there's room for shared worship spaces? Interfaith harmony is so important these days.
Why is this even a dispute? The ASI survey clearly shows it was a temple complex. Raja Bhoj was a great patron of learning and culture - this site represents our civilizational heritage. Muslims have been praying here but history can't be ignored. Let the court decide based on evidence, not emotions.
I've visited Bhojshala - the architecture is stunning. But the sense of contested space there is palpable. The Muslims who've prayed there for generations now face displacement, which isn't easy. I wish our leaders would prioritize communal harmony over political gains. Both sides need to show flexibility here.
The Supreme Court should expedite this case - these disputes create unnecessary tension. But I'm also critical of how we handle heritage sites. Instead of fighting over who owns the past, why not make it a museum preserving both Hindu and Muslim elements? That would be true secularism.
We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.