IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE
VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA, ALOK AWASTHI
Hindu Front For Justice (Regd. Trust No. 976) Through Its President Ms. Ranjana Agnihotri – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
ORDER
Per: Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla
[1] The aforesaid petitions and appeal deal with the common issues, to the claim of prayer by hindus/namaz by muslims/prayer by Jain samaj in "disputed area" of Bhojshala and Kamal Maula Mosque situated at Dhar. In these petitions, a challenge has also been made to the order dated 7.4.2003 passed by Archaeological Survey of India to the extent to restrict the right of Hindus to worship in Bhojshala Complex "the disputed area" on a particular day and timings and also challenge to the order permitting the muslim community to offer namaz on Friday in the "disputed area" and in some petitions different reliefs are claimed in relation to the same "disputed area". Regard being had to the similitude of these petitions, they are being disposed of by the common order, however, the facts of each case and the arguments of learned counsel for parties are recorded separately.
WRIT PETITION NO.10497/2022
(HINDU FRONT FOR JUSTICE (REGD. TRUST NO.976) THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT MS. RANJANA AGNIHOTRI & ORS.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
[2] The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs:-
"[i] Issue an appropriate writ,











Surendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of M.P. & Others
DLF Housing Construction P. Ltd. Vs. Delhi Municipal Corpn. & Ors.
State of Rajasthan Vs. Bhawani Singh & Ors
P.R. Murlidharan & Ors. Vs. Swami Dharmananda Theertha Padar & Ors.
Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad through its Commissioner Vs. State of Maharashtra & another
M. Nagabhushana Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors.
Dr. Subramanian Swamy Vs. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors and other connected petitions
M Siddiq (D) Thr Lrs. vs Mahant Suresh Das & Ors
Ghulam Abbas and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others
Masjid Shahid Ganj Versus S.G.P Committee
Gunwant Kaur(Smt) & Ors. Vs. Municipal Committee, Bhatinda Vs. Municipal Committee, Bhatinda & Ors.
Real Estate Agencies v State of Goa
State of Gujarat v Vora Fiddali Badruddin Mithibarwala
Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India & Ors.
Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi
E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu
Real Estate Agencies v State of Goa
Nagabhushana Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors.
Dr. Subramanian Swamy Vs. State of Tamil Nadu & Ors and other connected petitions
Sheodan Singh Vs. Daryao Kunwar (Smt.)
Forward Construction Co. Vs. Prabhat Mandal
The Places of Worship Act, 1991 does not bar the determination of the religious character of a place of worship, which must be established through evidence in court.
The court ruled that the plaints disclose a valid cause of action, are not barred by limitation, and the religious character of the property requires evidence to be determined at trial.
Parties in religious disputes can assert rights based on historical practices and public endowment; possession can confer title through adverse possession.
A court may grant leave to institute a suit without notice under Section 80(2) CPC if urgent relief is necessary, and the appointment of an Advocate Commissioner for local investigation is valid and ....
Appointment of Advocate Commissioner for inspection of Gyanvapi premises – Report of Commissioner does not by and of itself amount to a substantive finding on matters in dispute and is subject to pro....
The character of a temple as public or private is determined by its use for public worship and community management, not solely by registration status.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.