Bhojshala Complex And Kamal Maula Mosque Is Held To Be Bhojshala With Temple Of Goddess Vagdevi: MP HC
Let me begin with a disclaimer: I can never feel happy at any High Court or Supreme Court judgment in favour of temple or mosque in any nook and corner of India because I consider no difference between a temple and a mosque and regard them both in equal highest esteem. I must clarify that right from my childhood days I never had the habit of visiting temples and always worshipped Mahadev only at my house without bowing, folding hands, touching hands on legs, touching nose on ground leave alone shaking nose on ground but from April 1993 in Mackronia locality in Sagar in Madhya Pradesh where I was staying in ground floor in rented building and Sageer Khan on first floor, I developed the habit of visiting temples and one particular temple where I visited most punctually was at Hanuman temple in which Devi Durga shrine was also built but was famous as Hanuman temple in Mandir Marg in Civil Lines in Sagar in Madhya Pradesh. Since then I developed the habit of regularly visiting temples. The dedication with which Sageer Khan folded hands, bowed, touched nose on ground and shake nose on ground first while entering temple and then again with folded hands in front of Hanuman idol repeating same process of folding hands, bowing, touching nose on ground, shaking nose on ground and getting up and then doing parikrama and again same process and same process in front of Devi Durga idol and before leaving temple again same process of bowing, touching nose on ground and shaking nose on ground not only just erected but also consolidated and deepened my faith in both these deities also. Sageer Khan was most deadly against offering namaz at disputed sites and on roads and believed that it is better not to pray at all then to offer by disturbing or hurting others or at disputed sites. I too believe in the same! Sageer Khan termed Ayodhya, Kashi and Mathura as most Hindu holy cities in world where not even one mosque should ever be built! But I am not so rigid on this and no matter how many mosques are built in these 3 Hindu holy cities, it makes absolutely just no difference to me! When I lost all my faith in idol worship in 1994 and wanted to embrace Islam, it was Sageer Khan who solely revived my faith and ensured that I don’t give up my faith in Mahadev by taking vow from me that I shall never enter mosque and always said that Hindus are most tolerant in the world and religion are different path just like mountaineer chooses different paths only to reach the same top of a mountain! Having said this, I concede that we have to respect whatever verdict a court gives especially being a lawyer from the legal profession. In a significant development, we see that the Division Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court at Indore comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla and Hon’ble Mr Justice Alok Awasthi in a most notable judgment titled Hindu Front For Justice (Regd. Trust No. 976) Through Its President Ms. Ranjana Agnihotri & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors and other connected matters in Writ Petition No. 10497 of 2022 and 5 others cited in Neutral Citation No.: 2026:MPHC:IND 8805 that was pronounced as recently as on 15 May, 2026 has minced absolutely just no words to hold in no uncertain terms that the disputed Bhojshala-Kamal Maula Mosque complex in Dhar as a protected monument with the character of a Hindu temple dedicated to Goddess Vagdevi (Saraswati). The Court quashed the April 7, 2003, Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) order that had restricted Hindu worship to specific days and permitted Friday namaz for the Muslim community by splitting access to the 11th-century structure between people of both faiths by days of the week. The court thus granted exclusive right for daily worship to Hindus.
Before the judgment was pronounced, the Division Bench was hearing the case on a daily basis from April 6. The arguments were heard for 36 days before reserving the matter. The High Court while quashing the old order that restricted Hindu prayers and allowed namaz at the site said the Muslim side can approach the State government for land at an alternative site in Dhar district to build a mosque.
In hindsight, it may be recalled that it was the Supreme Court Bench led by CJI Hon’ble Mr Justice Surya Kant and comprising of Hon’ble Joymalya Bagchi and Hon’ble Mr Justice Vipul M Pancholi which issued an order in January asking the Madhya Pradesh High Court to decide the matter by examining the ASI survey report. In 2022, the Hindu Front for Justice had approached the MP High Court seeking a scientific survey to determine the religious character of the Bhojshala. The High Court had ordered the survey on March 11, 2024 which was conducted between March 22 and June 30 at the one-acre site.
It was held by the Division Bench that the statutory freeze that was imposed by the Places of Worship Act, 1991, would not apply to it since it is a protected ancient monument governed by a different law. It must be noted that while deciding the character of the structure, the Division Bench held that the 1991 law applies only to suits and bars alteration in the religious character of any place of worship. In this present case, since the Indore Division Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court was deciding writ petitions seeking enforcement of fundamental rights of citizens under Article 226 of the Constitution, this judgment held that the constitutional powers of the High Court cannot be overridden by the legislation.
We need to note that this judgment is significant as the mosque committee had challenged the maintainability of the petitions by members of the Hindu community that in turn challenged an order of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) of April 7, 2003 permitting namaz to be offered at the mosque. The lawyers for the mosque committee vehemently contended that under the 1991 Act, as on August 15, 1947, the place was a mosque and Section 4 of the 1991 law freezes the religious character of this place of worship as on that day. While relying on a comprehensive scientific survey by the ASI – which unearthed 94 sculptures and over 150 Sanskrit inscriptions – the Division Bench ruled that the site was constructed by Raja Bhoj in 1034 AD and that the subsequent conversion into a mosque during the medieval period occurred via the reuse of temple materials without a valid Waqf dedication.
Plainly speaking, the Division Bench in this recent judgment authored by Hon’ble Mr Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla for a Division Bench of Indore Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court for himself and Hon’ble Mr Justice Alok Awasthi set the record straight by pointing out that, “Under Section 4(3) of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, monuments governed by the 1958 Act are excluded from its operation. Hence, the 1991 Act does not apply to this monument and cannot be used to claim fixed religious status.” The 1958 law refers to the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 (AMASR Act). The court noted that the structure qualifies as an ancient monument due to its historical and archaeological significance under this law.
Most significantly, the Division Bench encapsulates in para 211 what constitutes the cornerstone of this notable judgment postulating precisely that, “Accordingly, the WP No.10497/2022 (Hindu Front for Justice (Regd. Trust No.976) through its President Ms. Ranjana Agnihotri & Ors.) and WP No.10484/2022 (Kuldeep Tiwari & Ors.) are allowed and disposed with the following directions:-
[i] The disputed area of ‘Bhojshala and Kamal Maula Mosque’ is held to be a protected monument under 1958 Act with effect from 18.3.1904. [ii] The religious character of disputed area of the Bhojshala Complex and Kamal Maula Mosque is held to be a Bhojshala with a temple of goddess Vagdevi (Saraswati).
[iii] The impugned order dated 7.4.2003 passed by the Director, ASI (paragraph 3 of the said order) to the extent restricting right of Hindus to worship within the Bhojshala complex, in the property in question at land No.604 (Old No.313) and also permitting the prayer by the Muslim community are quashed.
[iv] The Government of India and the ASI will take a decision for the purpose of administration and management of the affairs of the Bhojshala temple and Sanskrit learning within the property in question at Land No.604 (Old No.313) situated at Dhar, District Dhar and the ASI will continue to have overall administration and management of the property in accordance with the provisions of the Act 1958.
[v] The ASI shall have full supervisory control over the preservation, conservation and regulation of religious access.
[vi] So far the relief claimed by the petitioners to bring back the Pratima of goddess Saraswati from London Museum, UK and re-establish same within the Bhojshala complex, the petitioners in WP No.10497/2022 and WP No.10484/2022 have already made number of representations to the Government of India, the Government of India may consider their representations to bring back the Pratima of goddess Saraswati from London Museum and re-establish the same within the complex.
[vii] In order to secure the religious rights of the Muslim community and to ensure complete justice between the parties, in case if the respondent No.8 submits an application for allotment of a suitable land within the Dhar district for the construction of a Mosque or a place for prayer, the State Government may consider the said application in accordance with law for allotment of a suitable and permanent part of land in Dhar district to the Muslim community which may be represented either through the respondent No.8, appellant, interveners or a duly constituted Waqf body for the construction, administration of a mosque and associated religious facilities.”
It is worth noting that the Division Bench notes in para 212 that, “Accordingly, the WP No.10497/2022 filed by Hindu Front for Justice (Reg. Trust No.976) through its President Ms.Ranjana Agnihotri & Ors and WP No.10484/2022 filed by Kuldeep Tiwari are allowed and disposed of. WP No.8986/2026 filed by Salek Chand Jain is hereby dismissed. WP No.28334/2019 filed by Maulana Kamlauddin Welfare Society through its President Abdul Samad Khan S/o Sirajuddin Khan and WA No.559/2026 filed by Qazi Zakullah & Ors. are also dismissed. No order as to costs.”
In sum, one has to accept grudgingly or ungrudgingly what Madhya Pradesh High Court has held so explicitly in this leading case. If Muslim side is not happy, they definitely have their option to appeal to Apex Court after preparing in a more better manner than earlier. Till then we have to keep our fingers crossed about what the final outcome would be!
Author Bio
