sadalawpublications.com

Hindu Plaintiffs

Allahabad High Court Upholds Survey Order in Sambhal Masjid Case, Says Hindu Plaintiffs’ Suit Is Maintainable

Trending Today Allahabad High Court Upholds Survey Order in Sambhal Masjid Case, Says Hindu Plaintiffs’ Suit Is Maintainable Karnataka High Court Declares Power Subsidy Denial to Farmer Societies Unconstitutional, Upholds Cooperative Farming Rights India Imposes Import Restrictions on Bangladeshi Goods Through Northeast Checkpoints Odisha YouTuber Under Probe for Alleged Links to Detained Spy Jyoti Malhotra in Pakistan Espionage Case Supreme Court Denies Stay on Rohingya Deportation, Questions Claims of Forced Expulsion into Sea Supreme Court Rules in Favor of ISKCON Bangalore in Hare Krishna Temple Ownership Dispute Major Bureaucratic Reshuffle in Delhi Under Rekha Gupta’s Leadership India Ready to Remove All Tariffs on US Goods, Says Donald Trump Supreme Court Rules Insurance Companies Not Liable for Ensuring Long-Term Well-Being of Accident Victims Supreme Court Upholds Use of Urdu for Official Purposes in Maharashtra: Varshatai v. State of Maharashtra (2025) Allahabad High Court Upholds Survey Order in Sambhal Masjid Case, Says Hindu Plaintiffs’ Suit Is Maintainable MAHI SINHA 19 May 2025 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. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Allahabad High Court Upholds Survey Order in Sambhal Masjid Case, Says Hindu Plaintiffs’ Suit Is Maintainable Allahabad High Court Upholds Survey Order in Sambhal Masjid Case, Says Hindu Plaintiffs’ Suit Is Maintainable Sada Law • May 19, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Karnataka High Court Declares Power Subsidy Denial to Farmer Societies Unconstitutional, Upholds Cooperative Farming Rights Karnataka High Court Declares Power Subsidy Denial to Farmer Societies Unconstitutional, Upholds Cooperative Farming Rights Sada Law • May 19, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments India Imposes Import Restrictions on Bangladeshi Goods Through Northeast Checkpoints India Imposes Import Restrictions on Bangladeshi Goods Through Northeast Checkpoints Sada Law • May 18, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Allahabad High Court Upholds Survey Order in Sambhal Masjid Case, Says Hindu Plaintiffs’ Suit Is Maintainable Read More »

Supreme Court maintains a status quo on worship, allowing both Hindus and Muslims to continue their practices….

Trending Today Woman loses Rs 20 crore in Aadhaar digital arrest scam Supreme Court maintains a status quo on worship, allowing both Hindus and Muslims to continue their practices…. Supreme Court slams YouTuber Ranveer Allahbadia for ‘obscene’ remarks, grants interim protection ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS 2024 SSC ONLINE SC 312 The Role of Intellectual Property in Promoting Innovation in India Supreme Court Strikes Down Electoral Bond Scheme as Unconstitutional for Undermining Transparency and Democratic Principles on dated 15th February, 2024. Historic Verdict: Supreme Court Overturns 1998 Ruling P.V. Narasimha Rao v. State (CBI/SPE), Ends Immunity for Lawmakers Taking Bribes for Votes on 4th March, 2024 Supreme Court Overrules Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd The State or its instrumentality cannot tinker with the “rules of the game” insofar as the prescription of eligibility criteria Validity of LMV Driving License for Transport Vehicles Supreme Court maintains a status quo on worship, allowing both Hindus and Muslims to continue their practices…. NITU KUMARI 18 Mar 2025 Case : Laxmi Devi vs. State of Uttar Pradesh Update: March 2024 The Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi city is at the centre of a dispute in court. While Muslims performed namaaz in the mosque and the surrounding courtyard, the Supreme Court of India struck a balance by permitting a selected Hindu priest to continue worshipping inside the Gyanvapi grounds’ cellar, or tehkhana. Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud‘s three-judge panel determined that maintaining the status quo was “appropriate” in order to “allow both communities to offer religious worship.” In this manner, namaaz is offered on the mosque’s grounds. They protect the tehkhana. Chief Justice Chandrachud said verbally that the agreement would be upheld until the trial. The court mandated that neither of the disputing parties would alter the status quo. The Hindu plaintiffs, who are led by veteran attorney Shyam Divan, assert that since Satyug, the whole space of the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi has been a temple dedicated to Swayambhu Lord Shiva, referred to here as Adi Vishweshwar. They claimed that the Farman of Emperor Aurangzeb in the year 1669 destroyed the temple, which had previously been located on the Gyanvapi property. The complaint that the Hindus filed in a Varanasi court, according to senior counsel Huzefa Ahmadi for the management of Anjuman Intazamia Masjid, was only a ploy to invade the mosque’s property. Following the suit by the Hindus, who first sought a judicial declaration of their right to worship within the mosque premises, and then the “discovery” of a Shivling, the mosque managers have been engaged in a protracted legal battle. However, the Muslim side asserted that the building was a fountain. The courts had permitted a “scientific survey” and carbon dating of the building. The most recent events include two consecutive rulings by the Varanasi court permitting Hindu religious ceremonies to take place in the mosque’s cellar, which is accessible from the south side of the building. The Bench discovered that while Muslims may enter the mosque for namaaz from the northern side, the cellar could only be accessed from the southern side. Following the directives of January 17 and January 31, Muslims are currently offering namaaz without any restrictions. The Hindu priest’s puja offering is limited to the cellar area. The court clarified that it would be appropriate to preserve the status quo in order to allow both populations to practice their respective religions. The court emphasized that Hindus’ religious worship must be conducted in strict accordance with the guidelines in the January 31, 2024 decision and be under the Receiver’s safe custody as stipulated in the January 17, 2024 order. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as sadalawpublications@gmail.com. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Case laws ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS 2024 SSC ONLINE SC 312 ASSOCIATION FOR DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS 2024 SSC ONLINE SC 312 sadalawpublications@gmail.com • March 13, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Strikes Down Electoral Bond Scheme as Unconstitutional for Undermining Transparency and Democratic Principles on dated 15th February, 2024. Supreme Court Strikes Down Electoral Bond Scheme as Unconstitutional for Undermining Transparency and Democratic Principles on dated 15th February, 2024. sadalawpublications@gmail.com • March 7, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Historic Verdict: Supreme Court Overturns 1998 Ruling P.V. Narasimha Rao v. State (CBI/SPE), Ends Immunity for Lawmakers Taking Bribes for Votes on 4th March, 2024 Historic Verdict: Supreme Court Overturns 1998 Ruling P.V. Narasimha Rao v. State (CBI/SPE), Ends Immunity for Lawmakers Taking Bribes for Votes on 4th March, 2024 sadalawpublications@gmail.com • March 6, 2025 • Case law • No Comments 1 2 3 4 Next »

Supreme Court maintains a status quo on worship, allowing both Hindus and Muslims to continue their practices…. Read More »