Supreme Court urges UP government to maintain peace and harmony in Sambhal, prohibits the trial court from taking any further steps till January

Directives issued by the SC include sealing of the survey report, listing of revision appeal against trial court’s survey order within three days, instructs the Masjid Committee to approach the High Court

On November 29, 2024, the Supreme Court heard the petition filed by the Committee of Management of the Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal, which had challenged an ex-parte order issued by the Civil Judge (Senior Division) of Sambhal directing a court commissioner to conduct a survey of the mosque. The said order directed a survey of the mosque following claims that it was constructed by Mughal emperor Babar in 1526 after demolishing a temple. The order, which sparked significant unrest in Sambhal, including violent clashes that resulted in loss of life, had raised critical questions about the intersection of legal processes, historical narratives, and communal sensitivities.

Based on the hearing, the Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar decided to keep the petition filed by the Shahi Jama Masjid Committee pending. However, the Court directed the Masjid Committee to first approach the High Court to challenge the trial court’s order directing a survey of the mosque. In its order, the Supreme Court prohibited the trial court from taking any further steps in the matter until January 8, and unless the High Court hears the appeal. The Court also instructed that the survey report prepared by the Advocate Commissioner be kept sealed and unopened until further notice. This decision was made to ensure procedural fairness and avoid any escalation of tensions in the region, highlighting the Court’s focus on preserving peace and maintaining neutrality in a highly sensitive issue.

Emphasis on preservation of peace and neutrality

During the hearing, a bench underscored the need for peace and harmony in Sambhal District. Addressing the Uttar Pradesh administration, the bench stated: “Peace and harmony must be preserved. We must act with complete neutrality and ensure no harm is caused.”

The Supreme Court placed a specific emphasis on the Uttar Pradesh government’s responsibility to maintain communal harmony in the district. It suggested forming mediation committees to help de-escalate tensions and ensure that all parties feel heard in the process.

Details of the proceedings

Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, appearing for the mosque committee, argued that the trial court’s decision was capable of causing “great public mischief” and noted a concerning pattern across multiple cases nationwide. He pointed out that in such cases, the appointment of surveyors on the very first day of filing has become a “modus operandi,” which requires urgent judicial intervention.

Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna, heading the bench, acknowledged that the trial court’s order could be challenged under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) and the Constitution. He stated, as per LiveLaw, that “We may have some reservations, but the petitioner must challenge the order before the appropriate forum.” The CJI further clarified that since the order was not appealable under Order 41 of the CPC, a first appeal could not be filed.

The CJI expressed the Court’s intent to maintain peace and harmony in Sambhal District, stressing neutrality in handling the sensitive issue. He remarked, “We are not going into the merits. We don’t want anything to happen in the meantime. Peace and harmony must be preserved. We have to be absolutely, totally neutral and ensure nothing untoward happens.” Addressing the Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj, representing the Uttar Pradesh district administration, the CJI emphasised, “We will keep this matter pending, but peace and harmony must be maintained in the meantime.”

Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, appearing for the respondents, informed the Court that the trial court proceedings were scheduled for January 8, 2025. Ahmadi, in response, urged the Supreme Court to prevent any further steps in the trial court, emphasising the urgency of staying proceedings.

The Supreme Court, in its detailed order, stated that no further steps in the suit would be taken by the trial court without the High Court’s permission. The bench directed that the trial court proceedings remain on hold until January 8, 2025. Additionally, it instructed the respondents and district authorities to maintain peace and suggested forming mediation committees to ensure harmony. The Court also clarified that if the petitioners filed a revision appeal before the appropriate forum, it should be listed within three working days.

In summing up, the Supreme Court reiterated its trust in the district administration and judiciary to ensure neutrality and prevent any escalation of communal tensions. The Court also noted that the trial court must await directions from the High Court before proceeding further. The CJI’s remarks and directives underscored the need to handle the issue with caution, fairness, and a commitment to maintaining public order.

Gist of the Supreme Court’s directives

    Trial court proceedings: The trial court was directed not to proceed with the case until January 8, 2025, or until the High Court provides further directions.

    Survey report: The report prepared by the Advocate Commissioner was ordered to be kept in a sealed cover and remain unopened until further instructions.

    Appeal listing: If the Masjid Committee files a revision appeal before the High Court, the Court directed that it must be listed within three working days to ensure timely resolution.

    Neutrality and harmony: The Supreme Court emphasised the need for the Uttar Pradesh government and district administration to act with absolute neutrality and ensure communal harmony is preserved in the region.

The Supreme Court’s decision to keep the petition pending demonstrates its intent to closely monitor the situation while ensuring procedural compliance. The case will likely hinge on the High Court’s evaluation of the Masjid Committee’s petition. Meanwhile, the trial court proceedings are frozen, and the Advocate Commissioner’s report remains sealed.

The Court’s directives also highlight the judiciary’s careful balancing act in communal matters, prioritising peace and neutrality while ensuring that legal challenges follow due process. The next developments are expected in January 2025 when the trial court proceedings are scheduled to resume, subject to High Court directions.

This case reflects the ongoing tension between legal claims over historical sites and the imperative to maintain public order, with the judiciary serving as a critical arbiter in these disputes.

Background of the case

The controversy began when the Civil Judge (Senior Division) of Sambhal issued an ex-parte order directing a survey of the Shahi Jama Masjid in Chandausi. The plaintiffs claimed that the mosque was constructed by Mughal emperor Babar in 1526 after demolishing a temple that previously stood at the site. The survey order, however, led to unrest in the area, reportedly resulting in the deaths of four individuals.

The Masjid Committee, represented by Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, challenged the trial court’s decision on multiple grounds. The committee argued that the survey was conducted in “undue haste” without providing the mosque’s representatives an opportunity to present their case. It contended that the order violated the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, which prohibits the alteration of the character of religious places as they existed on August 15, 1947. Furthermore, the committee pointed out that the Shahi Jama Masjid is a protected ancient monument under the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).

Courtesy: Sabrang India

Note: This news is originally published in sabrangindia.in and is used completely for non-profit/non-commercial purposes especially for human rights.