Back
Echoes of History: MP High Court Grapples with Bhojshala's Temple-Mosque Divide
In a packed virtual and physical courtroom at the in Indore, Justices Vijay Kumar Shukla and Alok Awasthi oversaw intense arguments on , in the long-simmering Bhojshala Temple-Kamal Maula Mosque dispute. Multiple —including WP No. 10497/2022 filed by the —pitted Hindu petitioners against the , the , and Muslim respondents, as counsels from both sides clashed over the 11th-century site's true identity. The bench adjourned the matter to the next day, signaling prolonged scrutiny.
Ancient Monument, Modern Battleground
Nestled in Dhar district, Madhya Pradesh, the Bhojshala complex—protected by the ASI—has fueled controversy for years. Hindus revere it as a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati, built in the 11th century during King Bhoj's reign, and seek exclusive worship rights. Muslim groups, however, view it as the Kamal Maula Mosque, citing a declaration by the erstwhile that officially recognized it as such.
The dispute traces back to connected cases like WP 6514/2013 and recent filings such as WP 10484/2022 and WP 28334/2019, alongside a (WA 559/2026). Hindu petitioners argue the site was originally a temple, encroached upon later, demanding archaeological surveys and Hindu-only access. This echoes broader tensions over religious sites, though no direct invocation of laws like the , appears in the proceedings yet.
Muslim Side's Bold Counter: 'No Record, Just Hypotheticals'
, representing Muslim intervenors and appellants, delivered a pointed rebuttal. She argued the are inadmissible, as they concern a specific community rather than widespread public interest. Menon unveiled a key document: an "Ailaan" (government order) from Dhar State dated , gazetted as a legal notification affirming the structure as a mosque.
The Muslim body emphasized, as reported in court proceedings,
"no historic record of Saraswati temple demolition"
exists at Bhojshala. They dismissed Hindu claims as a
"hypothetical construct,"
urging the court to respect the ruling and ASI's protection status. Advocates like (via video conference) and others bolstered this with historical assertions.
Hindu Front's Push: Reclaim the Saraswati Sanctum
On the other side, and a battery of advocates for the asserted Bhojshala's temple origins, rooted in scriptures and architecture. They seek to halt Muslim prayers on designated Hindu days and enforce exclusive Hindu worship, framing it as a restoration of heritage rights. represented Union respondents, while state advocates backed the proceedings.
Arguments from counsels like and highlighted alleged encroachments, demanding judicial intervention for equity.
Court's Measured Pause: Tomorrow's Reckoning
With several advocates, including , heard in part, the bench—signed off by registrar Varghese Mathew—noted:
"
,
, and
- Advocates for the intervener... have concluded their arguments."
Justices Shukla and Awasthi directed:
"List tomorrow, ."
No substantive ruling emerged, but the order underscores the case's complexity, blending history, faith, and law.
Key Observations
-
"No historic record of Saraswati temple demolition at Bhojshala"
– Muslim body's submission, challenging Hindu narrative.
-
"The court of the then-Dhar State declared the 11th-century monument... a 'mosque' in
"
– Cited as binding precedent.
-
"It is not legal to treat the Bhojshala dispute as a matter of widespread public interest"
– Shobha Menon's admissibility challenge.
Ripples for Religious Sites Nationwide?
This adjournment keeps the spotlight on Bhojshala, a flashpoint in India's temple-mosque litigations. A final verdict could influence ASI-managed sites, balancing heritage preservation with worship rights. As arguments resume, the court holds the key to whether history's whispers will yield to modern claims—or vice versa.
