New Delhi: The Hindu Tehreek-e-Insaf on Thursday told the Madhya Pradesh High Court that documents from the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), including its scientific survey report, support its claim that a mosque was preceded by a temple in the disputed Bhojsala complex in Dhar district.The Bhojshala complex is considered by the Hindus to be the Wagadevi (Saraswati) temple, while from the Muslim side it is considered the Kamal Mullah Mosque. The dispute has triggered several petitions and writ appeals over the religious nature of the site, which have been heard by the Indore bench every day since April 6.
The Hindu Tehreek-e-Insaf claimed in its public interest litigation (PIL) that a temple dedicated to goddess Saraswati stood on the 11th-century site and after the temple was demolished, its remains were repurposed to build a mosque.On the fourth day of hearing, advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, appearing for one of the petitioners, summarized his arguments before a division bench of Justices Vijay Kumar Shukla and Alok Awasthi. Jain raised the issue of the existence of a Saraswati temple at the site and alleged that “Muslim rulers with an anti-idolatry mentality” demolished the Hindu place of worship and repurposed its remains to build a mosque in the complex.In support of his argument, Jain cited the ASI Scientific Survey Report 2024 prepared on the directions of the high court, its replies and affidavits, and historical documents issued by central government agencies in 1902 and 1904. He claimed that the case of the petitioner was supported by the material provided by the ASI based on the actual situation at the scene.“This does not mean that ASI is taking sides. ASI is simply recording the facts based on the existing situation at the site,” Jain told the court. He also told the court that the report listed several pieces of evidence of the existence of a temple at the site, including religious symbols, Sanskrit inscriptions and remains of deities.However, when Jain started referring to parts of the scientific investigation report in detail, a senior lawyer representing the center objected, insisting that ASI lawyers were tasked with “presenting” its findings in court. Counsel for the intervenors on the Muslim side also objected, arguing that the petitioner relied on the documents of the respondent (ASI) to support its case, which was not permitted by law.After considering these objections, the high court allowed Jain to highlight certain relevant portions of the ASI report, which was handled by the Union Ministry of Culture.The High Court on March 11, 2024 directed the ASI to conduct a scientific survey of the Bhojshala-Kamal Maula mosque complex. The investigation began on March 22, 2024, and after 98 days of investigation, the ASI submitted its report on July 15, 2024. The report, which spans more than 2,000 pages, revealed that a large building dating to the Paramara period (9th to 13th century) existed on the site that preceded the mosque, and that part of the temple was reused in the current complex.The Muslim side has challenged the ASI investigation and refuted the Hindu side’s claim that the site was originally a temple, claiming that some of the material contained in the investigation was “brought in through the back door”.
, incl.){kind=link}