Latest news with #PlacesofWorshipAct
Time of India
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Allahabad HC clears way for Sambhal mosque survey: Here's what court said in its verdict
PRAYAGRAJ: Allahabad high court dismissed on Monday the Sambhal Shahi Jama Masjid committee's petition challenging a Nov 19, 2024 trial court order directing an advocate commissioner to survey the structure, the subject of a suit claiming that the mosque was built in 1526 after demolishing a temple, reports Rajesh Kumar Pandey. While upholding the trial court's survey order, Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal vacated the interim stay on the Hindu plaintiffs ' suit. The mosque committee had asked for the suit to be dismissed on the ground that the Hindu side's claim to the site was prima facie barred under the Places of Worship Act, 1991. The legislation prohibits conversion of any place of worship and mandates maintaining the religious character of any such site that existed on Aug 15, 1947. HC: Plaintiffs only seeking right to access to Sambhal site This is not a case where any conversion of place of worship is taking place or the religious character is being changed. The plaintiffs have only sought right to access to a protected monument, declared in 1920 under Section 18 of Ancient Monument and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, the 45-page judgment states. In its petition, the mosque committee contended that the civil judge (junior division) ordered the survey "hastily" and "without issuing notice". Based on the Nov 19 directive, a survey was conducted that very day and another one on Nov 24. Later that month, SC stayed proceedings in the trial court until the mosque committee's petition against the survey order was heard by an HC bench. Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) said in its submission to the bench that the mosque had been designated as a protected monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. This effectively means that its status is governed by preservation laws rather than religious classification. ASI also mentioned that nowhere in official records was the mosque described as a religious place. The Hindu plaintiffs contend that the disputed Sambhal mosque stands at what used to be site of an ancient Harihar temple dedicated to Kalki, last avatar of Vishnu. The suit claims in 1526, on orders of Mughal emperor Babar, the temple was partially demolished and a mosque built over it.
Hindustan Times
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
HC rejects plea against Sambhal mosque survey
The Allahabad high court on Monday dismissed a petition by the Sambhal mosque committee challenging a controversial trial court decision last year that ordered a survey of the Mughal-era mosque that triggered violence and resulted in the deaths of four people. Tension has simmered in the Uttar Pradesh town since November last year when a civil court directed the advocate commissioner to conduct a survey of the Mughal-era Shahi Jama Masjid on a suit filed by Hindu groups that the Islamic structure was built after demolishing a temple. In a 45-page judgment, the high court rejected the claim of the mosque committee that the Hindu groups' petition was prima facie barred by the Places of Worship Act, 1991, which locks the religious character of any place of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947. 'This is not a case where any conversion of place of worship is taking place or any religious character of place of worship is being changed. Plaintiffs have only sought right to access to a protected monument declared in the year 1920 under Section 18 of the Ancient Monument and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958,' the high court said. 'I find that court below had not committed any error, irregularity or illegality in granting leave to institute the suit …Revision fails and is hereby dismissed. Interim order stands vacated. Suit to proceed. No order as to cost,' Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal. The decision marks a setback for the mosque committee that argues that the Hindu petition violates the 1991 law. Last December, the Supreme Court issued a nationwide directive restraining all courts from entertaining fresh suits or passing orders to survey mosques to determine whether temple structures lie beneath them, till the top court adjudicates on challenges to the Places of Worship Act. 'We respect the high court order. If the legal committee advises further action, it will be considered. We will comment further only after reviewing the high court's order,' mosque panel's counsel advocate Shakeel Warsi said. Advocate Gopal Sharma, who represented the Hindu side, welcomed the ruling. 'We welcome the honourable high court's decision. The petition was bound to be dismissed as per legal survey ordered by the civil judge senior division of Sambhal was within the law and was appropriate.' To be sure, if the HC had ruled in favour of the Muslim side then the survey report would have been scrapped. Located in the heart of the city in the Kotgarvi locality, the Shahi Jama Masjid is an important religious and historical site for the Muslim community. It is believed to have been constructed around the 16th century by Mir Hindu Beg, a Mughal general. The mosque is a protected monument notified on December 22, 1920. It also figures on Archeological Survey of India's website (Moradabad division) in the list of centrally protected monuments. On November 19, a civil court ordered a survey of the mosque on a petition by advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, claiming that it was built after razing a Hindu temple in 1529. An 'initial survey' of the mosque was held the same day. Jain is also a petitioner in the Gynavapi Masjid case, and it was on his plea that a Varanasi court on April 8, 2022 ordered a controversial survey of the mosque complex abutting the Kashi Vishwanath Temple. On November 24, four people were killed and dozens injured as protesters clashed with police after a second inspection of the mosque that turned violent. The case resonated in Parliament and the Supreme Court, and was one of the prominent cases where the top court clamped a moratorium on proceedings. The results of the survey were submitted bycourt-appointed advocate commissioner Ramesh Raghav in a sealed packet to the court of civil judge (senior division) on January 2. The Sambhal case is part of a flurry of pleas over the past three years that argue that Islamic holy sites were built after demolishing temples, and therefore should be replaced. Other cases include the Gyanvapi Masjid in Varanasi and the Shahi Eidgah mosque in Mathura – both adjoining famous temples. On November 29, the top court ordered the Sambhal court to halt proceedings in the case over the mosque and its survey while directing the UP government to maintain peace and harmony in the violence-hit town. Then, on December 12, the Supreme Court issued a nationwide directive restraining all courts from entertaining fresh suits or passing orders to survey mosques to determine whether temple structures lie beneath them. The directive came from a special bench, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna, which clarified that trial courts cannot 'overreach' the Supreme Court while it adjudicates on challenges to the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. The Places of Worship Act was enacted to preserve the religious character of all places of worship as they stood on August 15, 1947. The law expressly prohibits altering the religious nature of sites and includes stringent penalties for violations, though it exempted the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid site in Ayodhya due to ongoing litigation at the time. Despite the significance of the issue, the matter had seen little progress in the Supreme Court over the last two years. During the hearing, the Muslim side argued that the mosque is an ASI-protected monument and the court could not have ordered its survey. In its submissions, the Hindu side said that the disputed structure stood on a government land and the court was within its powers to order a survey. The court, however, refused to interfere with the trial court's November order on the survey. 'Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that no interference is required in the order dated 19.11.2024 passed by court ,' the high court said.
Time of India
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Allahabad high court upholds trial court order, backs Sambhal mosque survey
PRAYAGRAJ: Allahabad high court dismissed on Monday the Sambhal Shahi Jama Masjid committee's petition challenging a Nov 19, 2024 trial court order directing an advocate commissioner to survey the structure, the subject of a suit claiming that the mosque was built in 1526 after demolishing a temple, reports Rajesh Kumar Pandey. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now While upholding the trial court's survey order, Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal vacated the interim stay on the Hindu plaintiffs ' suit. The mosque committee had asked for the suit to be dismissed on the ground that the Hindu side's claim to the site was prima facie barred under the Places of Worship Act, 1991. The legislation prohibits conversion of any place of worship and mandates maintaining the religious character of any such site that existed on Aug 15, 1947. HC: Plaintiffs only seeking right to access to Sambhal site This is not a case where any conversion of place of worship is taking place or the religious character is being changed. The plaintiffs have only sought right to access to a protected monument, declared in 1920 under Section 18 of Ancient Monument and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958, the 45-page judgment states. In its petition, the mosque committee contended that the civil judge (junior division) ordered the survey "hastily" and "without issuing notice". Based on the Nov 19 directive, a survey was conducted that very day and another one on Nov 24. Later that month, SC stayed proceedings in the trial court until the mosque committee's petition against the survey order was heard by an HC bench. Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) said in its submission to the bench that the mosque had been designated as a protected monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act , 1958. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now This effectively means that its status is governed by preservation laws rather than religious classification. ASI also mentioned that nowhere in official records was the mosque described as a religious place. The Hindu plaintiffs contend that the disputed Sambhal mosque stands at what used to be site of an ancient Harihar temple dedicated to Kalki, last avatar of Vishnu. The suit claims in 1526, on orders of Mughal emperor Babar, the temple was partially demolished and a mosque built over it.
Time of India
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
HC junks Sambhal mosque panel's plea, allows survey
Prayagraj: The Allahabad high court on Monday dismissed a petition filed by the Sambhal mosque committee challenging the trial court's order passed on November 19 last year directing an advocate commissioner to survey the mosque in a suit, which claimed that the mosque was built after destroying a temple. With this, the court has upheld the trial court's survey order. It also added that the Hindu plaintiffs ' suit is prima facie not barred. Dismissing the civil revision petition filed by committee of management, Jami Masjid, Sambhal, Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal vacated the interim stay order on the suit pending before the court below. The court directed the suit to proceed. In its 45-page judgment, the court rejected the claim of the mosque committee's counsel that the present suit of the plaintiff is prima facie barred by the Places of Worship Act, 1991, which prohibits conversion of any place of worship and provides for maintenance of religious character of any place of worship as existed on August 15, 1947. "This is not a case where any conversion of place of worship is taking place or any religious character of place of worship is being changed. Plaintiffs have only sought right to access to a protected monument declared in the year 1920 under Section 18 of the Ancient Monument and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958," the court added. The Sambhal trial court's order dated November 19, 2024 was passed on a suit filed by plaintiffs, who claimed that the Sambhal mosque was built in 1526 after demolishing a Hindu temple that stood there. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch CFD với công nghệ và tốc độ tốt hơn IC Markets Đăng ký Undo It was the case of the mosque committee before the Allahabad high court that the civil judge (junior division) had passed the survey order hastily, without issuing notice to them. The survey of the mosque was undertaken on the same day (Nov 19), and again on Nov 24, 2024. On the other hand, in their suit, the Hindu plaintiffs have claimed that the mosque in question was originally the site of an ancient temple (Harihar temple) dedicated to Kalki, the last avatar of Lord Vishnu. In 1526, on the orders of Mughal ruler Babar, the temple was partly demolished and converted into a mosque. The trial court proceedings were effectively stayed by the Supreme Court in November last year. The apex court had directed that the trial court shall not proceed further with the matter until the mosque committee's petition against the survey order is listed before the HC. During the case hearing in the HC, the ASI had submitted its counter stating that the said mosque has been notified as a centrally protected monument. After Independence, the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act , 1958 (AMASR Act ), came into effect, and its provisions are now applicable to such monuments and nowhere is the mosque described as a religious place in official records. The ASI has further argued that there is no historical, archaeological, or revenue evidence supporting the term 'Shahi Masjid'. Its counter adds that under Section 5 of the AMASR Act, the ASI is empowered to acquire rights for the preservation of protected monuments, and Section 4 also authorises the central government to declare any monument of historical importance as protected, thereby any unauthorised claims of ownership or control (referring to Masjid Committee's claims) have no meaning.
Hans India
17-05-2025
- Politics
- Hans India
CJI Gavai begins with a bang
May 14 of 2025 will go down in the annals of Indian judicial history as a red-letter day for various historic reasons. No sooner was he administered the oath of office by President Droupadi Murmu on Wednesday and he became the 52nd Chief Justice of India (CJI), Justice Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai entered the record books as only the second Dalit CJI after Justice K G Balakrishnan, and the first Buddhist to occupy the exalted position. However, these statistics apart, Justice Gavai comes with an envious track-record that has earned him the reputation of being a 'fiercely independent' judge for the upright manner with which he handles cases. As the CJI and head of the Supreme Court collegium, he has to reckon with several key issues at a particularly critical time for the judiciary, whose dispute with the executive is mounting by the day and the public's trust in the judicial system is eroding. Meanwhile, for one, who plays by the rule book and is known as a hands-on judge, Justice Gavai commenced his innings as the CJI with a bang. In a demonstration that is indicative of what is to come in the next six months (CJI Gavai is due to retire on November 23), he delivered a ruling, his first judgement as the CJI, which has been the hallmark of his entire career as a judge that took off in 2005 when became a permanent judge and served it with aplomb before being elevated to the Supreme Court on May 24, 2019. He not only declared the Maharashtra government's 1998 decision to transfer forest land to private entities for non-forest use as illegal but also slammed what he termed as 'a classic example of the nexus between politicians, bureaucrats and builders.' In fact, he saw the involvement of the then Revenue minister. This no-holds-barred 'nexus' contention is not surprising as the legal fraternity is aware of his penchant to give a patient hearing to arguments before rendering an authoritative justice as per law. This was evidenced by the deft handling of the defamation case against Rahul Gandhi or while ordering the release of Prabir Purkhayastha, the political activist and founder of NewsClick, who spent 225 days in jail after his arrest by the Delhi Police under UAPA. Justice Gavai has many high-profile cases like the Maharashtra forest land transfer case up ahead. A chilling fact is that there were 82,445 pending cases in the apex court as of January. In the intervening four months, this figure must have increased. One will keenly watch how he handles the more critical and sensitive cases that need to be prioritised like the Places of Worship Act, criminalisation of marital rape and the Waqf Act, among several others, whose outcomes can redefine policy-making exercises. His 'SC can't be aloof when the country is in danger' take, while organising a two-minute silence to express solidarity with the victims of the Pahalgam massacre, or while granting bail on the grounds that a long period of imprisonment without trial exemplifies his humane side. The CJI criticised the Supreme Court Bar Association for not organising a farewell get-together for Justice Bela M Trivedi, after she opted for an early retirement. By maintaining that 'the Association ought not to have taken such a stand,' he showed that it was morally binding to honour traditions per se. GJI Gavai commands respect because he symbolises integrity and fairness in their noblest forms.
