Back
Bhojshala Battle Heats Up: MP High Court Unlocks ASI's 96-Day Survey Vault for Mosque Claimants
In a pivotal move amid the simmering Bhojshala temple-mosque dispute, the has ordered the (ASI) to upload its exhaustive 96-day videographic record of the site's scientific survey onto a secure digital platform. The directive, issued by a division bench of Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla and Justice Alok Awasthi on April 21, 2026, ensures access for the —key litigants claiming the site as a mosque—while prioritizing transparency in this decades-old religious flashpoint.
The order stems from ongoing writ petitions, including WP No. 10497/2022 filed by the , challenging the site's status and seeking to reclaim it as the ancient Vagdevi (Saraswati) temple.
Roots of the Rift: From Parmar Era to Modern Litigation
The Bhojshala complex in Dhar district has long fueled tensions. Hindu groups assert it's a 11th-century temple built by King Bhoj of the Parmar dynasty, dedicated to Goddess Saraswati. Muslims counter it's the Kamal Maula mosque, with historical records listing it as such since 1925-26.
The dispute escalated through multiple petitions: WP/6514/2013, WP/28334/2019, WP/10484/2022, and WA/559/2026. A flashpoint was the ASI's recent scientific survey, whose preliminary findings indicated the current structure was erected using remnants of a pre-existing Hindu temple from the Parmar era. This fueled Hindu claims, but Muslim litigants demanded scrutiny of the full evidence, including videography captured over 96 grueling days.
intervention in Civil Appeal No. 4127/2026 on April 1, 2026, nudged the High Court to consider all objections, including those emerging from the footage, in line with natural justice principles.
Clash of Counsel: Temples, Mihrabs, and Waqf Walls
Petitioners, led by advocates like Vishnu Shankar Jain for , hammered on ASI's report affirming temple origins, arguing for restoration of Hindu worship rights.
Respondent No. 8, , represented by senior advocate
Salman Khurshid
, pushed back fiercely via IA No. 2318/2026. They insisted on videography access to flag discrepancies, citing the 's explicit nod:
"the learned High Court, after seeing such videography, shall consider those objections too, along with other objections made by the parties, in accordance with the principles of natural justice."
Interveners like Syed Ashhar Ali Warsi bolstered the Muslim side, brandishing 1925-26 revenue records deeming it a mosque. They highlighted absent temple hallmarks—no garbha griha or shikhara—versus clear mihrab and qibla features. Warsi invoked the Waqf Act, 1995, noting the one-year objection window to the 1985 Waqf survey had lapsed decades ago. He also referenced British-era documents questioning the Vagdevi idol's Bhojshala provenance, tracing it instead to a city palace.
ASI counsel resisted, citing the footage's massive size and time demands, but the bench dismissed logistics as no bar to fairness.
Bridging Evidence Gaps: Court's Razor-Sharp Reasoning
The bench dissected the 's April 1 order, rejecting ASI's narrow view that only judicial viewing sufficed. Echoing natural justice tenets, it mandated litigant access to empower informed objections. No precedents were directly cited beyond the SC directive, but the ruling reinforces broader principles from cases like temple-mosque surveys (e.g., Gyanvapi parallels), prioritizing evidentiary equity over administrative hurdles.
Spotlight Quotes: The Bench Speaks
-
On SC Mandate :
"We have no doubt that the learned High Court... shall consider those objections too, along with other objections made by the parties, in accordance with the principles of natural justice."
(Quoting SC order) -
Core Directive :
"we direct Archeological Survey of India to upload the videography... on a secured digital platform such as google drive link... and to provide access to the counsel for respondent No.8 and to the ."
-
Deadline Pressure :
"Archeological Survey of India shall ensure that uploading... is done with top priority by 27.4.2026."
Verdict and Ripples: Footage by April 27, Hearing Tomorrow
The court unequivocally ruled:
"In view of the observations made in para 6 of the order of the Apex Court dated 01.04.2026, we direct..."
ASI must comply by April 27, 2026, with copies rushed to its Delhi and Bhopal heads. Hearings continue daily per SC fiat, next on April 22.
This unlocks crucial evidence, potentially reshaping arguments on the site's identity. For Hindus, it tests ASI's temple-origins claim; for Muslims, a chance to debunk via visuals. Beyond Bhojshala, it sets a transparency benchmark for future religious site surveys, ensuring no party fights blindfolded.
