Online Desk: The ongoing temple-mosque disputes at several places in Uttar Pradesh have now reached Aligarh, adding the historic Jama Masjid in the Uparkot area to the growing list of contentious religious sites. A petition has been filed in the civil court claiming that the Jama Masjid was originally a Shiva temple and that it was built on the site of a Hindu fort. The petition, submitted by RTI activist and Anti-Corruption Army leader PanditKeshav Dev Gautam, has been accepted, and a hearing is scheduled for February 15, 2025.
PanditGautam, who has been active in filing petitions and seeking transparency, claims that the Jama Masjid, like several other mosques in Uttar Pradesh, was constructed on the site of an earlier Hindu temple or religious structure. In his petition, Gautam argues that the mosque was built based on “fake documents” and that the location originally housed a large Hindu fort and a religious site, either a Buddhist stupa, Jain temple, or a Shiva temple. Gautam has obtained information through an RTI application filed with the Archaeological Department and the municipality, which allegedly reveals that there is no clear historical record supporting the mosque’s construction on the site.
In his RTI request, Gautam sought clarification from the Aligarh Municipal Corporation regarding the ownership and construction details of the mosque. According to the response received, the mosque was built on government land, with no available records indicating when it was constructed or who holds the ownership rights. The Municipal Corporation also clarified that the mosque is not owned by any individual, raising further questions about its legitimacy.
Based on this information, Gautam filed a petition demanding that the mosque be removed and the site be restored as a Shiva temple. The civil court has now accepted the case.This dispute in Aligarh follows a growing trend of similar claims in other districts of Uttar Pradesh, including Sambhal, Baghpat, Badaun, Firozabad, and Bareilly, where mosques are being claimed to have been constructed on the remains of ancient temples.
In Sambhal, for example, it was alleged that the Jama Masjid was built on the remains of the Hari Har temple, and a survey was ordered by the court to investigate these claims. Similarly, disputes in Baghpat and Badaun have centred on the argument that mosques were built on the grounds of former temples.
The rise of such disputes comes at a time when the Supreme Court has stepped in to manage these temple-mosque controversies more carefully. Recently, the court instructed lower courts not to pass any survey orders related to temple-mosque disputes without explicit permission. The Supreme Court has emphasised the need to resolve petitions under the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, to provide clarity and prevent further unrest surrounding such matters.
As the legal process continues, the upcoming hearing on February 15 will likely draw attention to the sensitive and increasingly contentious issue of temple-mosque disputes in Uttar Pradesh. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for similar claims across the state.
