The Allahabad High Court has upheld a lower court’s order permitting a survey of the Mughal-era Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal, dismissing a petition filed by the mosque's caretakers and stating that the suit filed by Hindu plaintiffs seeking access to the site is not prima facie barred by the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.

On Monday, May 19, the judgment, delivered by Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, affirmed the Sambhal civil court’s November 19, 2024 order that had directed a local investigation by an advocate commissioner.

“I find that court below had not committed any error, irregularity or illegality in granting leave to institute the suit. Revision fails and is hereby dismissed. Interim order stands vacated. Suit to proceed. No order as to cost,” Justice Agarwal said.

The plaintiffs in the original civil suit claim that the mosque, built during the reign of Mughal emperor Babur in 1526, was constructed after demolishing a temple known as the Harihar Mandir, which they believe was dedicated to the Hindu deity Kalki, the prophesied avatar of Vishnu. The civil court in Sambhal had granted leave to institute the suit and, on the same day, directed an advocate commissioner to conduct a survey of the site.

The survey, carried out within hours of the court's order, drew criticism from the mosque’s managing committee, who argued that it was conducted hastily and without necessity.

A second round of the survey on November 24 turned violent, leading to clashes in the area and the deaths of at least four Muslim men. The local Muslim community alleged that the survey was provocative and unwarranted.

Senior advocate S.F.A. Naqvi, representing the mosque committee, challenged the legality of the proceedings, arguing that the court granted leave for the suit before the expiry of the mandatory notice period, and approved the advocate commissioner’s appointment without establishing urgency.

He also contended that the site was protected under the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904, and governed by a 1927 agreement between the Collector of Moradabad and the mosque's trustees.

Naqvi further argued that the dispute had already been settled in 1878 and could not be reopened, particularly in light of the 1991 Places of Worship Act, which prohibits the conversion of any religious site’s character as it existed on August 15, 1947.

However, the high court rejected all three arguments. Justice Agarwal held that the trial court had committed no procedural or legal error in granting leave to file the suit or in appointing an advocate commissioner.

“This is not a case where any conversion of place of worship is taking place or any religious character of place of worship is being changed. Plaintiffs have only sought right to access to a protected monument declared in the year 1920 under Section 18 of the Ancient Monument and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958,” Justice Agarwal said.

He noted that the mosque managing committee, being a private entity, was not entitled to notice under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code.

Moreover, the appointment of the commissioner did not prejudice the mosque’s position, as the report can still be challenged before being admitted into evidence.

The court cited a February 27 inspection report by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), which supported the Hindu plaintiffs’ concerns that artefacts and symbols of a Hindu temple might be removed or concealed. The ASI report mentioned that the mosque had undergone several renovations, including complete floor replacement and interior painting that obscured the original surfaces.

The high court’s ruling paves the way for the continuation of the suit and further investigation into the religious claims over the mosque.

Meanwhile, the mosque committee has criticised the timing and manner of the survey, arguing that the legal process was misused to inflame communal tensions. The case remains a flashpoint in the broader national debate over historical religious sites and their contemporary claims.