A petition sought the demolition of the historic mosque, but court records clarify that only a small area of 0.12 acres, not the entire court premises, is registered as Waqf land
NEW DELHI – The historic mosque between Gates 4 and 5 of the Delhi High Court has been the subject of multiple legal challenges in recent years. The latest petition sought its demolition, but court records have clarified that only a small area of 0.12 acres, not the entire court premises, is registered as Waqf land.
On April 16, during the hearing of petitions challenging the amended Waqf Act, Chief Justice of India, Sanjiv Khanna, who had served as a judge at the Delhi High Court for 14 years, made a notable remark. In the context of waqf-by-user cases, he mentioned, “When we were in (the) Delhi High Court, we were told that the High Court itself is built on Waqf land.” This statement added a layer of complexity to the ongoing legal battle regarding the mosque situated at a historically significant location.
The mosque, which dates back to the reign of Sher Shah Suri, stands on Sher Shah Road and is believed to be over 400 years old. It has found itself embroiled in legal disputes for several years. It has been the subject of at least two petitions: one seeking its demolition and the other calling for a halt to construction activity on the premises.
The first legal challenges arose in the period between 2013 and 2015. Multiple petitions were filed during this time, demanding action over the mosque’s location on court property and alleged illegal activities in its vicinity. The legal battles raised significant concerns over the mosque’s proximity to one of the country’s crucial judicial institutions.
In 2015, a petition was filed by social activist Ajay Gautam, who sought the demolition of the mosque. Gautam’s plea raised two main issues: firstly, that religious activities, including the mosque, should not be allowed within the court’s precincts; and secondly, concerns were raised about alleged outsiders entering the court premises to offer prayers at the mosque. Currently, the mosque serves as a place of worship for various individuals, including lawyers, court staff, and litigants.
Speaking to The Indian Express, Gautam said, “All kinds of illegal activities, like encroachment, begging, etc., were going on along Sher Shah Road. It was a matter of security for all.” Gautam argued that the mosque’s existence within the court premises was a security threat.
However, court records and documents presented by the government and the Delhi Waqf Board clarified the situation. The documents indicated that only a 0.12-acre area, where the mosque is situated, was recorded as Waqf property. The larger area of the court premises was not considered Waqf land, dispelling the notion that the entire court was built on Waqf land.
A Delhi Gazette notification, dated December 10, 1969, refers to the mosque located on the Delhi High Court premises. This notification, which was later presented in court, listed the mosque as a Waqf Board property, mentioning its construction during Sher Shah Suri’s rule.
The notification explicitly mentioned the mosque as the only Waqf property on the court premises. It also highlighted that the mosque had been in use for worship for over 400 years. According to the notification, the Delhi Waqf Board was listed as the mosque’s caretaker (mutawalli), and it was valued at Rs 10,000 at the time.
In 2015, a division bench of Justices Pradeep Nandrajog and Pratibha Rani directed that all relevant records regarding the allotment of land for the construction of the Delhi High Court be produced in court. These records included layout plans of the court’s original construction, which had been maintained by the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs.
During the hearing, the court was shown the layout plan and maps which clarified that the 0.12-acre mosque area was excluded from the larger court premises when the land was allocated for the Delhi High Court. Consequently, the court concluded that the mosque area, being Waqf property, was not under its jurisdiction.
Gautam withdrew his plea after relevant documents and gazette notifications were presented in court. The documents confirmed that the mosque was registered as Waqf land, and the high court could not issue directions or intervene in matters related to Waqf land.
In fact, a similar case was raised two years before Gautam’s petition, in 2013, by a group of lawyers who expressed concerns over construction activities being undertaken at the mosque. The mosque committee had initiated renovations to repair the deteriorating structure. However, construction plans included an expansion of the mosque’s boundaries and the addition of minarets, which prompted objections.
On December 27, 2013, the high court issued an order to halt any construction activities at the mosque, directing that the status quo be maintained. The court’s decision to halt construction was part of a broader concern about the mosque’s location and the potential for expansion on the Waqf land.
The mosque’s management committee, led by Mobin Akhtar, a member of the committee and an advocate, has argued that the mosque is not situated directly on the court premises. According to Akhtar, the mosque is located near the Delhi High Court, and the court itself is around the mosque, not the other way around.
Senior Advocate Anil Soni, who represented the Central government in the 2015 case, explained that the mosque committee’s renovation plan included significant construction around the mosque, including plans to expand the mosque’s boundaries and construct minarets. These plans led to objections from the high court’s administrative committee, which intervened to ensure that the mosque did not infringe on the court’s premises.
Soni explained that the legal issue arose when the construction activities were perceived as an expansion on Waqf land, a matter that the high court could not regulate. The court ruled that as the mosque was situated on Waqf land, it fell under the jurisdiction of the Waqf Board and not the court.
The mosque’s place in history is significant, as it was established during the reign of Sher Shah Suri, one of the most renowned rulers of the Mughal period. Sher Shah Suri’s reign marked a period of consolidation and governance reforms in India. The mosque’s enduring presence on the Sher Shah Road has made it a part of the area’s historical landscape.
The legal disputes surrounding the mosque underscore broader issues of religious property, land ownership, and the governance of Waqf properties in India. The ongoing debates about the mosque’s existence on court premises reflect concerns about security, the use of public land for religious purposes, and the implications for future construction projects on Waqf land.
The future of the mosque remains uncertain, as legal and political discussions continue to unfold. However, the recent dismissal of the petition to demolish the mosque has provided a temporary relief to its supporters and caretakers. The Delhi Waqf Board and other stakeholders continue to advocate for the mosque’s preservation, emphasising its historical and cultural importance.
The controversy surrounding the mosque has revealed deeper issues related to Waqf land management and the intersection of religious spaces with public institutions. While the legal challenges have been dismissed, the mosque’s future remains a topic of ongoing debate. The case highlights the complexity of managing historical and religious properties in India and the challenges posed by the growing concerns about urban development, security, and land ownership in sensitive areas like the Delhi High Court.
The dismissal of the petition to demolish the mosque is a significant development in this long-standing legal saga, but the matter of the mosque’s role within the broader context of Waqf land administration remains open for further discussion.
