Allahabad High Court upholds lower court's order appointing Advocate Commissioner to survey Sambhal mosque

The Hindu

19-05-2025

The Allahabad High Court on Monday (May 19, 2025) upheld a lower court's order appointing an Advocate Commissioner to survey the 'disputed' Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal.
The mosque committee had approached the High Court challenging the survey, which was ordered under the suit filed by Hindu plaintiffs claiming the mosque had been built on the site by Mughal emperor Babur in 1526 after demolishing the Harihar temple, dedicated to Kalki, the last avatar of Lord Vishnu as per mythology.
Last November, a civil court in Sambhal ordered a survey of the mosque by an Advocate Commissioner. Soon after, Ramesh Raghav, the designated officer, conducted a harried survey of the mosque. The survey was followed by communal violence in the town, leading to the death of four persons.
The mosque committee, in its arguments, submitted that the dispute regarding the mosque had already been settled in the year 1877 and could not be adjudicated in the instant suit.
Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal observed that the lower had not committed any error, irregularity or illegality in allowing the survey.
'The argument set up by advocate SFA Naqvi that dispute in regard to Masjid already stood settled in 1877 and decree having been confirmed by this Court cannot be accepted at this stage in view of the fact that judgment of 1877 speaks of an old building, whereas in 1920 Juma Masjid was declared as a protected monument under the Act of 1904,' the court noted.
The court added that if the title suit was decided in favour of the mosque committee in the year 1877, then, why had it entered into an agreement in the year 1927 subjecting the structure in dispute to the Act of 1904 as the alleged agreement does not reveal the ownership of the mosque committee and clearly noted that the structure needed to be protected in pursuance of the Act of 1904 by Archaeological Department.
The court also noted this was not a case where any conversion of place of worship was taking place or any religious character of the place of worship was being changed and that the Hindu petitioners had only sought the right to access to a protected monument declared in the year 1920, under Section 18 of the Act of 1958.
'Once, it is an admitted position that the structure in question has been declared as a protected monument in 1920 and the same remained unchallenged till date, it is bound to be governed by provisions of law which existed when the notification was made and, thereafter, the laws enacted to govern such protected monument,' the court said.
It added that once the revisionist himself has subjected to the Act of 1904 (Act to provide for the preservation of Ancient Monuments) and, thereafter, to 1958 (Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act), he cannot take shelter of the Places of Worship Act of 1991 that aims to prevent the conversion of any place of worship and maintain the religious character as it was on August 15, 1947.