Dhar State court declared Bhojshala a 'mosque' in 1935, Muslim side claims in MP HC

The Muslim side in the Bhojshala Temple-Kamal Maula Mosque dispute case has claimed before the Madhya Pradesh High Court that the then-Dhar State court declared the 11th-century monument a mosque in 1935. She pointed to the contradictions, citing the Madhya Pradesh government and the ASIs differing opinions at different times in court cases filed over the years regarding the religious nature of the Bhojshala.

The Muslim side in the Bhojshala Temple-Kamal Maula Mosque dispute case has claimed before the Madhya Pradesh High Court that the then-Dhar State court declared the 11th-century monument a ''mosque'' in 1935. The Hindu community considers Bhojshala, located in Dhar district, a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati, while the Muslim side claims it to be the Kamal Maula Mosque. The disputed complex is protected by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). Senior lawyer Shobha Menon on Tuesday presented detailed arguments before the HC's Indore bench of Justices Vijay Kumar Shukla and Alok Awasthi in support of the intervention application and a writ appeal filed by one Munir Ahmed and others from the Muslim community. She questioned two public interest litigations (PILs) filed by an organisation, the Hindu Front for Justice, one Kuldeep Tiwari and another individual in the Bhojshala case. These petitions say Bhojshala is actually a Saraswati temple and that only Hindus should be granted the right to worship in the complex. Questioning the admissibility of the PILs, Menon argued that it is not legal to treat the Bhojshala dispute as a matter of widespread public interest, as it primarily concerns a specific religious community. Menon presented what she claimed was an ''Ailaan'' (government order) issued by the then Dhar State court (darbar) on August 24, 1935, as a legal notification or gazette, calling it a very important document. The lawyer claimed this ''Ailaan'' declared the disputed Bhojshala complex as a ''mosque'' and stipulated that 'namaz' (daily ritual prayer in Islam) would continue to be offered there in the future. Notably, Dhar was a princely state in Central India under the Bhopal Agency during the British Raj. Menon urged the high court to examine the Bhojshala dispute not from a religious perspective, but based on established principles of law. She pointed to the contradictions, citing the Madhya Pradesh government and the ASI's differing opinions at different times in court cases filed over the years regarding the religious nature of the Bhojshala. The ASI functions under the Union Culture Ministry. Menon said such shifting positions are inconsistent, arbitrary and unacceptable in the eyes of the law, as the government is expected to adopt a consistent and stable approach. The hearing in the Bhojshala case will continue on Wednesday. The high court has been regularly hearing four petitions and one writ appeal since April 6, contesting the religious nature of the monument.