SC to consider listing petition against Bhojshala in Madhya Pradesh
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to consider listing a petition against a "scientific survey" of "Bhojshala", a medieval-era structure in Madhya Pradesh's Dhar district which both Hindus and Muslims claim as their own.
The petition in the top court was filed by the Maulana Kamaluddin Welfare Society challenging the March 11 order of the Madhya Pradesh high court for a "scientific survey" of the shrine to ascertain it belonged to which community.
In its March 11 order, the high court order had directed the Archaeological Survey of India to carry out a survey of the Bhojshala complex within six weeks.
A bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and SVN Bhatti agreed to consider listing the matter after advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, appearing for the Hindu petitioners, submitted that the ASI has already filed its report. He also informed the bench that the Hindu side has filed its reply to the pending petition.
Under an arrangement devised by the ASI on April 7, 2003, Hindus perform puja on the Bhojshala premises on Tuesdays, while Muslims offer namaz in the complex on Fridays.
The apex court had on April 1 refused to stay a scientific survey of Bhojshala, an ASI-protected 11th-century monument. Hindus consider Bhojshala a temple dedicated to Vagdevi (Goddess Saraswati), while the Muslim community calls it Kamal Maula mosque.
While seeking responses on the plea, the apex court had said no action should be taken without its leave on the outcome of the impugned survey. The court said, “It is made clear that no physical excavation should be taken which will change the character of the premises in question.”
In its 30-page order on March 11, the high court said : “A proper documented comprehensively drafted report prepared by an Expert Committee of not less than five (5) senior-most officers of ASI headed by the Director General/Additional Director General of the ASI himself be submitted before this Court within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.”
The high court order came on an application filed by an organisation called the Hindu Front for Justice.
According to the plea, an ASI survey is a statutory duty which should have been fulfilled long back at the inspection stage when the "mystery and confusion" about the true character of the Bhojshala Saraswati temple (Bhojshala Temple)-cum-Maulana Kamal Maula mosque arose and led to disputes about its true status. The plea was moved by HFJ president Ranjana Agnihotri and others against the Union of India and others.
Allowing the plea, the high court had issued a number of directions to the ASI, including asking it to use the latest methods and techniques for the survey, and laid down procedures for the entire exercise.
The high court had said : "Complete scientific investigation, survey and excavation, through adoption of latest methods, techniques and modes of GPR-GPS survey of the site in question constituting the disputed Bhojshala temple-cum-Kamal Maula mosque complex, as also the entire 50 m of peripheral ring area surrounding/constituting the circular periphery from the boundary of the complex be conducted.”
"A detailed scientific investigation be conducted by adopting carbon dating method for ascertaining the age, life of various structures both above and beneath the ground; permanent, movable and immovable structures both beneath as well as above the ground, constituting the walls, pillars, floors, surfaces, upper top, sanctum sanctorum of the entire complex," it had noted.
The high court suggested giving a representation to the contesting sides on the expert panel tasked with carrying out the scientific investigation, survey and excavation of the site. It had also asked the ASI to prepare an inventory of each and every artefact, idol, deity or any structure found on the premises after opening the locked and sealed rooms and halls of the complex and submit the same to it along with photographs.
The high court had allowed the ASI to conduct any other study it deemed necessary to ascertain the true character of the complex and insisted that submissions relating to the right to worship and performing rituals on the disputed premises shall be considered only after the panel submits its report.
