The Allahabad High Court upholds a trial court survey order in the Sambhal Masjid dispute, declaring the Hindu plaintiffs’ suit maintainable. Learn more about the legal and historical details of this high-profile case.

Allahabad High Court Upholds Survey in Sambhal Masjid Dispute

In a significant development in the ongoing Sambhal Masjid dispute, the Allahabad High Court has ruled that the lawsuit filed by Hindu plaintiffs is not barred, thereby affirming the trial court’s order to conduct a survey of the mosque premises.

The decision comes after the Mosque Committee challenged the trial court’s November 19, 2024, order directing an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the mosque. Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal presided over the case and upheld the survey directive.

Background: Allegations of Temple Demolition in 1526

The case was filed by eight Hindu plaintiffs, including Mahant Rishiraj Giri, who allege that the Sambhal Mosque was constructed in 1526 following the demolition of an ancient Hindu temple—identified in the suit as the Hari Har Temple, dedicated to Kalki, the final avatar of Lord Vishnu.

According to the plaintiffs, the Mughal emperor Babur ordered the partial destruction of the temple, converting the site into a mosque.

Mosque Committee’s Argument Against the Survey

The Mosque Committee contended that the Civil Judge (Junior Division) had issued the survey order in haste, without giving the committee a chance to present their case. Despite this objection, the mosque was surveyed twice—on November 19 and November 24, 2024.

Supreme Court’s Temporary Stay on Proceedings

In November 2024, the Supreme Court of India stayed further proceedings in the trial court until the High Court ruled on the Mosque Committee’s appeal. That stay was lifted with this recent High Court judgment.

Archaeological Survey of India’s (ASI) Counterclaim

During the High Court hearing, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) argued that the disputed site, referred to as the Juma Mosque, is a Centrally Protected Monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 (AMASR Act).

The ASI stated that there is no documentation referring to the mosque as an active place of worship after India’s independence. They further noted that terms like “Shahi Masjid” are unsupported by historical, archaeological, or financial records.

Legal Implications of the AMASR Act

According to the ASI, Sections 4 and 5 of the AMASR Act grant the Government of India the authority to classify any monument of historical importance as protected, and allow the ASI to take over such sites for preservation. Thus, any claim of ownership by the Mosque Committee lacks legal validity under this act.

Conclusion: A Case of History, Faith, and Legal Complexity

The Sambhal Masjid case is a complex intersection of history, faith, and legal interpretation. The Allahabad High Court’s recent ruling may pave the way for a deeper investigation into the origins of the mosque and its historical significance. As the case unfolds, it will likely continue to stir legal, religious, and political debate across the country.