SC Orders Status Quo On Suit Against Sambhal Masjid Till Aug 25

Sambhal Temple-Mosque Row

The Supreme Court on Friday directed that the current situation be maintained in the dispute over the Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, until Monday, August 25.

The order came during the hearing of an appeal filed by the mosque committee against a recent Allahabad High Court ruling.

Appeal Against Court’s Ruling

A bench of Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar was considering the mosque committee’s challenge to the High Court’s May 19, 2025, decision. The High Court had ruled that a suit filed by Hindu plaintiffs seeking access to the mosque was not barred under the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.

Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, representing the mosque committee, argued that the High Court had erred in its interpretation of the 1991 Act. Justice Narasimha asked whether the matter should be linked to the larger batch of cases already pending before the Court concerning the Places of Worship Act.

Debate Over ASI-Protected Monument

Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, appearing for the Hindu plaintiffs, countered that the case did not involve the 1991 Act. He said the mosque is a protected monument under the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and therefore falls outside the Act’s scope. Jain emphasized that the plaintiffs were only seeking access to the structure and were not attempting to change its religious character.

Jain also referred to another Supreme Court order passed earlier the same day, which reportedly stated that ASI-protected monuments are not covered by the 1991 Act.

The bench asked him to produce that order on Monday. “We will see that order. We do not want to pass inconsistent orders,” Justice Narasimha observed, while posting the matter for further hearing and directing that the status quo remain.

Case History & Background

The High Court had earlier dismissed the mosque committee’s challenge to a November 19, 2024, trial court order that appointed an Advocate Commissioner to conduct a local inspection of the mosque premises. The inspection had sparked communal tensions in the area, leading the Supreme Court to stay the trial court proceedings until the High Court’s decision.

The original suit was filed by 8 Hindu plaintiffs, including Mahant Rishiraj Giri, claiming that the mosque, built in 1526, was constructed after partially demolishing an ancient Kalki temple. They sought the right to access the monument, which is protected under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.

Court examined 3 issues: whether permission to file the suit before the expiry of a mandatory government notice was valid; whether the trial court was justified in appointing a commissioner; and whether the 1991 Act barred the suit.

It upheld the plaintiffs on all counts, observing that the mosque had been declared a protected monument as early as 1920 and that an agreement recognizing ASI’s maintenance role was signed in 1927.