6 hrs ago
Gujarat High Court Seeks Response on Bharuch Mosque Dispute
A group of five people says Bharuch’s Jami Masjid should be recognized as a Jain temple.
They told the Gujarat High Court that some objects at the site may have been damaged and asked for protection of an idol they identify as Mallinath.
The government’s lawyer said the monument had been maintained according to the law.
The judge asked central authorities to provide more information and respond on October 13.
The judge also said the petitioners had not first gone to the relevant authorities.
At the same time, the court noted that the Archaeological Survey of India must protect the monument and the idol.
The dispute is connected to a campaign seeking to reclaim the site as a Jain religious place.
Earlier, officials were warned about possible gatherings and risks to the structure and communal harmony.
Five petitioners asked the Gujarat High Court to declare Bharuch’s Jami Masjid a Jain temple.
They alleged damage to artefacts and sought urgent protection for an idol they identify as Mallinath.
Justice Nisha M Thakore asked central authorities to provide complete instructions and respond by October 13.
The court noted the petitioners had not first approached the relevant authorities, while observing that the ASI must protect the monument and its contents.
The dispute follows a campaign to reclaim the site and earlier concerns about gatherings, possible damage and communal harmony.
- Who
- Five petitioners, including Hari Shankar Jain, brought the case; Justice Nisha M Thakore heard it.
- What
- The petition seeks a declaration that Jami Masjid is a Jain temple and protection for the site and an idol.
- Where
- Bharuch, Gujarat, and the Gujarat High Court.
- When
- The court hearing took place on Friday; the next hearing is scheduled for October 13.
- Why
- The petitioners allege damage to artefacts and fear further harm to an idol they identify as Tirthankar Mallinath.
Petitioners’ claims
Authorities’ and trustees’ positions
Religious identity of the site
Petitioners’ claims
The petitioners seek a declaration that the structure is a Jain Hindu temple, not a mosque as recorded in ASI records.
Authorities’ and trustees’ positions
The central authorities’ counsel said the protected monument had been maintained according to law; the article reports no court ruling on the site’s religious identity.
Condition and protection of the site
Petitioners’ claims
The petitioners alleged that images, artefacts and sculptures had been damaged and sought urgent protection for the idol they identify as Mallinath.
Authorities’ and trustees’ positions
The central authorities’ counsel said the monument was maintained strictly in accordance with the law. The court said the ASI has a statutory duty to preserve and protect the structure, including the idol.
Key facts
- Petitioners
- Five, including Hari Shankar Jain
- Site
- Bharuch’s Jami Masjid
- Judge
- Justice Nisha M Thakore
- Next hearing
- October 13
- Petitioners’ requested declaration
- That the structure recorded as a mosque in ASI records is a Jain Hindu temple
- ASI status described in earlier correspondence
- A protected Monument of National Importance under a gazette notification dated May 26, 1909
- Law cited by petitioners
- Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958
Quotes
Gujarat High Court
The court hearing the petition concerning Bharuch’s Jami Masjid.
“…the Court finds that the petitioners have invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court by preferring the present petition without having approached the authority, however the ASI is under statutory obligation to preserve and protect the structure including the idol.”
indianexpress.com
Sources
Related news
Ujjain Shahi Masjid Dispute Ends With High Court Agreement
Ujjain Mosque Demolition Sparks Clashes Amid Road-Widening Dispute
Madhya Pradesh High Court Upholds Partial Mosque Demolition in Ujjain
Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind to Approach Courts Over Saharanpur Mosque Demolition
Ujjain Mosque Removal Protest Escalates as Police Fire Tear Gas
Ujjain Shahi Masjid Damaged During Minaret Removal Work
Gujarat High Court Quashes FIR Over Buddha Images on Sarees
Supreme Court Upholds Increment for Regularised Daily-Wage Workers
Gujarat High Court to Examine Limits on Refusing Protest Permissions
Supreme Court Pauses Coercive Action Against Tata Chemicals
