Introduction

The Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, has become a flashpoint in a larger religious and legal dispute after a petition was filed questioning its historical origins. Alleging that the mosque was built on the site of an ancient Hindu temple, the case has triggered both legal challenges and violent clashes, raising concerns about communal harmony and the protection of religious sites.

Background of the Dispute

On November 19, 2024, a petition was filed in the Sambhal district court, claiming that the 16th-century Jama Masjid was constructed over the site of an ancient Hari Har Mandir. This claim mirrors similar petitions filed in other parts of India, including Varanasi, Mathura, and Dhar, where Hindu groups have sought to alter the religious character of mosques they believe were built on temple sites. The petitioners in the Sambhal case include advocate Hari Shanker Jain, a key figure in the Gyanvapi and Mathura disputes.

Survey and Clashes

The Sambhal court ordered a survey of the mosque on November 19, 2024, to investigate the historical claims. The initial phase of the survey, conducted peacefully, involved mosque authorities and local police. However, a second survey on November 24 escalated tensions, as it was accompanied by a procession led by a local priest chanting Hindu slogans. Protests soon turned violent, leading to stone-pelting, police firing, and at least five deaths, including two teenagers. Locals accused the police of excessive force, while the police denied allegations of shooting.

The Mosque’s Historical Context

The Shahi Jama Masjid was built by Mughal Emperor Babur's general, Mir Hindu Beg, around 1528. It is one of the three mosques constructed during Babur's reign, the other two being in Panipat and Ayodhya. Architectural studies suggest it was constructed using stone masonry with plaster, and while some historians believe it was built on a pre-existing structure, the mosque’s historical context is complex. Local Hindu tradition holds that the site was originally a Vishnu temple, with the belief that Kalki, the tenth avatar of Vishnu, will arrive there.

Legal Implications: The Places of Worship Act, 1991

The dispute touches upon the Places of Worship Act, 1991, which mandates the preservation of the religious character of all places of worship as they existed on August 15, 1947. The Act was designed to prevent further disputes over religious sites, except for the Babri Masjid case, which was already under litigation at the time. The petitioners in the Sambhal case argue that the religious character of the mosque should be altered, contradicting the Act’s provisions.

Challenges to the Places of Worship Act

The Places of Worship Act has been criticized for barring judicial review and preventing any changes to the religious status of sites that existed before India’s independence. Some legal experts suggest that while an inquiry into the religious nature of a place might be permissible, changing that character would violate the Act. The ongoing legal challenges in the Supreme Court, including cases from Varanasi, Mathura, and now Sambhal, highlight the complexities of reconciling India’s legal framework with communal sensitivities.

Conclusion

The Sambhal mosque dispute underscores the challenges in balancing India’s legal framework with religious and communal dynamics. While the Places of Worship Act aims to preserve the status quo, petitions challenging it have revived contentious debates over historical monuments and their religious significance. As the legal proceedings continue, the case will likely have far-reaching implications for India’s secular fabric and the preservation of communal harmony.