19 hours ago
Bahraich mazar demolition: HC seeks state's response on contempt plea
The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court has sought the state government's response on a contempt petition alleging that the Uttar Pradesh government violated an earlier assurance given to the court that no coercive action would be taken against the Dargah Hazrat Sayyed Mohammad Hashim Shah (also known as Lakkad Shah Mazar) situated in Bahraich district. On June 10, UP govt had informed the high court that it had stopped the demolition drive at Lakkad Shah and three other mazars situated in the Murtiha Range forest of Katarniaghat Wildlife division. (For Representation)
Justice Brij Raj Singh on June 25 directed the state counsel to seek instructions in light of the allegations made in the contempt plea directing to list the matter as fresh on July 3, 2025.
'Learned counsel for the applicant will serve a copy of the contempt application to the learned Standing Counsel today, who is directed to seek instructions in the matter as there is allegation that there is violation of the undertaking given by the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel in the order dated 10.06.2025 passed in Writ-C No.5870 of 2025,' the court ordered.
The contempt plea moved by the committee of management Dargah claimed that despite the state's categorical submission before the court on June 10, 2025, that the demolition had been stopped and no coercive steps would be taken for the next four weeks, the structure was fully razed on June 13.
Earlier, on June 10, the UP government had informed the high court that it had stopped the demolition drive at Lakkad Shah and three other mazars situated in the Murtiha Range forest of Katarniaghat Wildlife division in Bahraich. The state had also assured the court that no further demolition or coercive action would be taken for a period of four weeks.
This assurance was recorded by a division bench of Justice Saurabh Lavania and Justice Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi, which was hearing a petition filed by the managing committee of Waqf No. 108, which oversees the dargah where Urs has reportedly been celebrated since the 16th century.
The committee had moved the HC after the forest department initiated the demolition of these mazars, citing encroachment on protected forest land under the Indian Forest Act, 1927.
In the contempt plea, the waqf committee has alleged that on June 13, just 3 days after the state's assurance, the police personnel took the caretakers of the mazar and other people into custody and dropped them nearly a kilometre away from the site.
The plea further alleges that demolition at the site resumed soon thereafter and that the entire structure was razed and now only the graves are intact. The plea also accuses the authorities of wilful and deliberate breach of the undertaking and flouting the court's direction of maintaining the status quo at the site.
