Amid Waqf hearing in SC, a 400-year-old mosque near Delhi HC finds itself in the spotlight
On April 16, while hearing petitions challenging the amended Waqf Act, Chief Justice of India Sanjeev Khanna, who served as a judge at the Delhi High Court for 14 years, remarked in the context of waqf-by-user cases, 'When we were in (the) Delhi High Court, we were told that the High Court itself is built on Waqf land.'
The mosque in question — built during Sher Shah Suri's reign in Delhi and located between Gates 4 and 5 of the Delhi High Court on Sher Shah Road — has been the subject of at least two petitions, one seeking its demolition and the other asking for construction activity on the premises to be halted.
Between 2013 and 2015, multiple petitions were filed in court related to the mosque. (Photo by Sohini Ghosh)
The court's orders, records submitted by the government and Delhi Waqf Board documents, however, show that only the 0.12 acres on which the 400-year-old mosque stands — not the larger court premises — has been recorded as Waqf property.
The second of the two petitions against the mosque was filed in 2015, by one Ajay Gautam, who sought the mosque's demolition on two grounds: one, that a court's precincts cannot be used for religious purposes and two, over the alleged entry of outsiders to the court premises to offer prayers at the structure. At present, those on the High Court premises, including lawyers, court staff and litigants, offer prayers at the mosque.
Gautam, who claims to be a social activist, told The Indian Express, 'All kinds of illegal activities, like encroachment, begging, etc., were going on along Sher Shah Road. It was a matter of security for all.'
A Delhi Gazette notification, dated December 10, 1969, mentions the mosque on the Delhi High Court premises.
In March 2015, a Division Bench of Justices Pradeep Nandrajog and Pratibha Rani directed the production of 'relevant record(s) containing the letters/order allotting land for construction of the main building of the Delhi High Court', including the 'layout plan originally conceived when the main building of the Delhi High Court was constructed'.
Senior Advocate Anil Soni, the then Central government's standing counsel, says the layout plan, including maps maintained by the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, were shown in court. A Delhi Gazette notification, dated December 10, 1969, and issued under the Waqf Act, was also placed before the court.
Accessed by The Indian Express, the Delhi Gazette notification, published on April 16,1970, mentions the mosque as the only Delhi Waqf Board property on the court premises. The notification lists nearly 1,167 Waqf properties — a majority of them 'by use'.
The Delhi Gazette notification lists the Sher Shah Suri-era mosque on the Delhi High Court's premises as a 'Waqf Board property'.
Mentioned as a 'mosque in Sher Shah Mess, Sher Shah Road' in the Gazette notification, the listing states 'more than 400 years' under the column titled 'the date of creation of Waqf'. While 'worship' has been mentioned in the column on the structure's nature of use, the 'Delhi Waqf Board' has been mentioned as its 'mutawalli (caretaker)', besides the property being 'Waqf-administered by use' and 'Rs 10,000' as its value at the time.
When asked if the Delhi High Court was built on Waqf land, Azimul Haque, CEO, Delhi Waqf Board, said, 'Going by the notification, it is only the mosque.'
The court was also informed in 2015 that when land was allocated for the Delhi High Court near Sher Shah Road, the 0.12-acre mosque area, which is Waqf property, was excluded.
All these records, which were submitted to the court nearly six months after its March 2015 directions, showed that the court premises were never considered Waqf property.
Petitioner Gautam withdrew his plea after the gazette notification was brought on record and the court on September 11, 2015, asked Gautam how it could issue directions or regulate a Waqf Board property.
Also read | 'Shocking' 116% rise in waqf land after 2013 amendment, Centre tells Supreme Court
Two years before Gautam's 2015 plea, in 2013, a group of lawyers had sought the court's intervention on construction activity being undertaken at the masjid. On December 27, 2013, the Delhi High Court had directed that construction activity at the mosque be stopped and status quo be maintained.
Mobin Akhtar, a member of the mosque's managing committee and an advocate, says, 'Around 2013, the mosque committee decided to renovate and repair the masjid, which was in a shambles at the time. This resulted in the plea before the High Court.'
He adds, 'The mosque is not on the Delhi High Court premises. In fact, the Delhi High Court is located around the mosque.'
Senior Advocate Anil Soni, who had appeared as the Centre's standing counsel in the 2015 case, told The Indian Express, 'Construction (at the mosque) had started around December 2013. There was a plan to expand the mosque's boundary and construct minarets around it. There was also an objection to outsiders coming inside the High Court premises to pray. The High Court's administrative committee back then had intervened, deciding not to escalate the matter. Ultimately it was seen that the masjid was on Waqf land. The High Court had opined that it cannot issue directions or regulate Waqf land.'
Established in 1966 through the Delhi High Court Act, the court's main building was declared open on September 25, 1976, by then President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
4 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Murshidabad violence: Charge sheet filed by Bengal police against 13 in father-son murder case
KOLKATA: The West Bengal Police have submitted a charge sheet against 13 people in the father-son double murder case in Murshidabad's Zafarabad violence in April, a senior officer said. The murders of Haragobindo Das (74) and his son Chandan Das (40) took place on April 11 during the Dhuliyan-Suti-Shamshergunj communal violence, amid protests over the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 in the district. The riots left at least three people dead and many injured, besides forcing hundreds to flee their homes. The unrest, which lasted from April 8 to 12, had also caused widespread damage to public and private properties, prompting the Calcutta High Court to order the deployment of Central Armed Forces to restore law and order. "We have submitted the charge sheet before the district court within 55 days of the crime and have named 13 people in it," the official said on Friday. In the aftermath of the violence, the police had arrested over 300 suspected miscreants in connection with over 60 FIRs which were lodged at various police stations in Murshidabad. According to police reports at the Betbona village where the Das family residence was targeted, the attackers broke down the main door, dragged out Chandan Das and Hargobindo Das, and struck them with an axe in the back. A man reportedly stood guard until they died. Reports also noted that in some attacks, the rioters cut off the water supply to prevent fires from being extinguished. Although the details of those named in the charge sheet or the sections slapped on them were not immediately clear, a fact-finding team set up by the high court had named local Trinamool Congress leader Mehboob Alam, former chairman of the Dhuliyan Municipality, to have directed the attack. The team, while submitting its report before the high court on May 21, had also stated "inactivity and absence" of the state police, and added that the men in uniform did not respond to calls from the locals during the violence. The committee documented that "as many as 113 houses were badly affected in the village of Betbona", many of which were set on fire.
The Hindu
4 hours ago
- The Hindu
Murshidabad violence: Charge sheet filed by Bengal police against 13 in father-son murder case
The West Bengal Police have submitted a charge sheet against 13 people in the father-son double murder case in Murshidabad's Zafarabad violence in April, a senior officer said. The murders of Haragobindo Das (74) and his son Chandan Das (40) took place on April 11 during the Dhuliyan-Suti-Shamshergunj communal violence, amid protests over the Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025 in the district. The riots left at least three people dead and many injured, besides forcing hundreds to flee their homes. The unrest, which lasted from April 8 to 12, had also caused widespread damage to public and private properties, prompting the Calcutta High Court to order the deployment of Central Armed Forces to restore law and order. 'We have submitted the charge sheet before the district court within 55 days of the crime and have named 13 people in it,' the official said on Friday. In the aftermath of the violence, the police had arrested over 300 suspected miscreants in connection with over 60 FIRs which were lodged at various police stations in Murshidabad. According to police reports at the Betbona village where the Das family residence was targeted, the attackers broke down the main door, dragged out Chandan Das and Hargobindo Das, and struck them with an axe in the back. A man reportedly stood guard until they died. Reports also noted that in some attacks, the rioters cut off the water supply to prevent fires from being extinguished. Although the details of those named in the charge sheet or the sections slapped on them were not immediately clear, a fact-finding team set up by the high court had named local Trinamool Congress leader Mehboob Alam, former chairman of the Dhuliyan Municipality, to have 'directed' the attack. The team, while submitting its report before the high court on May 21, had also stated 'inactivity and absence' of the state police, and added that the men in uniform did not respond to calls from the locals during the violence. The committee documented that "as many as 113 houses were badly affected in the village of Betbona", many of which were set on fire.
Hans India
4 hours ago
- Hans India
HC grants relief to candidates
New Delhi : The Delhi High Court on Friday granted relief to CLAT-PG candidates over alleged discrepancies in the answer key and directed the consortium of NLUs to declare results soon. A bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela's decision came over the plea of students in relation to a couple of answers in the key. The court, however, rejected the objection with respect to the declared answer to a third question, and asked the consortium of national law universities (NLUs) to accordingly award marks to the candidates. The court passed the order while deciding three pleas seeking rectification of errors in the final answer key of the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT)-PG 2025. The bench's verdict highlighted the issue of a high fee of Rs 1,000 charged by the consortium per question for raising the objection to the provisional answer key, observing there ought to be a 'fine balance' between the concerns of the candidates and the institutions. While comparing the fee charged for objected questions by other organisations, the fees sought by the consortium 'appeared to be excessive and disproportionate' but the consortium's concern that it was required to keep frivolous individuals and coaching institutes at bay also did not appear to be 'fanciful or imaginative', it added. The bench, however, expected the consortium to take heed of its observations and take appropriate steps to 'avoid such excessive fee in the next examinations'. 'It may be advisable for the consortium to place this issue before the committee headed by Justice G. Raghuram (retd) for his valuable opinion which may be adhered to by it,' the bench said. The court ruled on the correctness of the answers in the answer key after considering each question and the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners and the consortium. CLAT determines admissions to undergraduate and postgraduate law courses in national law universities in the country. CLAT PG 2025 was held on December 1, 2024. Multiple pleas were filed in different high courts alleging several questions in the exam were wrong. On February 6, the Supreme Court transferred all the petitions over the issue to the Delhi High Court for a 'consistent adjudication'. The top court passed the direction on the transfer petitions of the consortium.
