Wells are never closed; they are always open. Even if the mosque is using the well, let others use it too, says Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna
NEW DELHI – The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted two weeks to the management committee of the Mughal-era Shahi Jama Masjid in the Uttar Pradesh city of Sambhal to respond to the status report filed by the Union government in an ongoing property dispute over a well located near the mosque premises.
A bench of Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar was hearing the matter, LawBeat reported.
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) KM Nataraj, along with Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, appeared for the respondents, while Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi appeared for the mosque committee.
The ASG informed the court that the government had filed a status report on April 22.
When the court asked why no reply had been filed by the petitioners, counsel representing them cited “extraordinary reasons,” explaining that the chairman of the mosque committee was currently in custody and that instructions were awaited.
Zafar Ali, the chairman of the mosque’s managing committee, was arrested on March 23 in connection with the violence last November in the city. He has been booked under nearly a dozen sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including some which have provision for sentence to life in jail.
Granting time, the court recorded, “At the request of the petitioners, who were unable to file a reply to the status report due to extraordinary circumstances, we grant two weeks for filing the response. The reply must be submitted within ten days.”
During the hearing, CJI Khanna asked whether the well was situated partly inside and partly outside the mosque.
ASG Nataraj stated that the well was completely outside the mosque premises and pointed to photographs submitted on record.
However, Senior Advocate Ahmadi disputed this, asserting that the well was “at the foot of the mosque” and covered with cement, with water being drawn through a pump installed by the mosque authorities.
CJI Khanna noted that wells are traditionally public utilities and remarked, “Wells are never closed; they are always open. Even if the mosque is using the well, let others use it too.”
Ahmadi responded that the well’s location raised sensitivities, especially with religious practices being performed nearby.
When the CJI asked, “Can this issue not be resolved sitting in a seat?”
“I thought this issue could be resolved because even if we assume that you (Masjid) are using the well, let others also use the well,” the CJI added.
Ahmadi agreed to consider an amicable resolution. “We can sit and discuss,” he said.
ASG Nataraj reiterated that the well lies entirely outside the mosque boundary and referred to its proximity to a nearby water tanker and a police outpost (“police chowki”), emphasising that access is not restricted to the mosque.
The court directed the mosque committee to file its reply within two weeks, stating that “someone else may file the reply” if the chairman remains in custody.
“Take a mulakat and do it, or someone else can also file the reply,” the CJI added before posting the matter after two weeks.
In February, the Uttar Pradesh government had submitted before the apex court that Shahi Jama Masjid at Chandausi is situated on public land. The government had also stated that the ‘Dharani Varah Koop’ well is also on public land which is located outside the mosque structure and the mosque’s management committee has opposed its revival.
Earlier, in January, the court had issued notice on the plea and ordered status quo with regard to the well.
In the main petition filed by the Masjid Committee, the CJI-led bench had asked it to approach the Allahabad high court with its petition against the ASI survey ordered by a civil court.
The Masjid Committee moved the Supreme Court seeking a stay on a civil court’s November 19 order directing a survey, to be conducted by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), of the 16th-century mosque.
They have sought a stay on the civil court’s order, arguing that the survey was conducted in “hot haste.” According to the petition, the survey was ordered and completed within a day, followed by another survey with barely six hours’ notice. “The manner in which survey was ordered in this case and has been ordered in some other cases will have an immediate impact in several cases across the country that have been filed recently concerning places of worship where such orders will tend to inflame communal passions, cause law and order problems and damage the secular fabric of the country,” the petition alleged.
