SC reserves order on Sambhal Jama Masjid survey; 1991 Act cited in plea

The Supreme Court reserved its decision on a mosque survey petition, amid ongoing disputes over religious site ownership and legal protections under the 1991 Act.

The Supreme Court on Friday reserved orders on a petition filed by the Sambhal Jama Masjid committee, challenging the survey of the mosque ordered by a trial court in a 2024 suit filed by Hindu plaintiffs who claim that the site was a temple.

The Allahabad High Court had upheld the survey in May 2025, against which the Masjid committee had moved the Supreme Court.

The Allahabad High Court had upheld the survey in May 2025, against which the Masjid committee had moved the Supreme Court.

A bench of justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe closed arguments after hearing both sides and the Uttar Pradesh government which maintained a neutral stand in the matter. The court clarified that the suit is still pending and what is to be decided by the court is the validity of the survey ordered in those proceedings.

At least four people were killed and several others injured in the violence that erupted near the Shahi Jama Masjid on November 24, 2024 during protests against a court-ordered survey of the Mughal-era mosque, which the Hindu side claims was built after razing a Harihar temple.

The mosque committee led by senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi along with advocate Mohammad Nizam Pasha pointed out that the suit is not maintainable as the issue falls under the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 that preserves the character of a place of worship existing as on August 15, 1947 and does not allow conversion of its religious character.

Additional solicitor general (ASG) KM Nataraj, representing the UP government, said that the suit is at a “nascent” stage and the state does not wish to go into the merits of the case, as it is duty bound to protect the interest of both the Hindu and Muslim parties.

Since the crux of the proceedings is whether the 1991 Act would apply, especially section 3 which bars conversion of a place of worship, ASG Nataraj said that the bar on further proceedings in the suit will only arise if it seeks “conversion” of the place of worship.

The Hindu side represented by advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain opposed the appeal, arguing that the structure is a protected monument since 1920 and the 1991 Act excludes such structures from its ambit. Jain cited the Bhojshala case in which the Madhya Pradesh high court held that the site was a Goddess Vagdevi temple. The Bhojshala site was under the management and control of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).

Jain said that the top court paved the way for the HC to examine this issue which clearly indicates that in such cases, prohibition under the 1991 Act will not apply.