A Delhi court has rejected a petition filed that sought the restoration of temples situated in Quwwat­ Ul-Islam mosque located at the Qutub Minar complex in Mehrauli. The suit was filed on behalf of Hindu deity Lord Vishnu, Jain deity Tirthankar Lord Rishabh Dev and others, seeking the restoration of 27 Hindu and Jain temples “dismantled, desecrated and damaged under the command and orders of Qutub-ud-din-Aibak”.

Rejecting the petition, the Court said that it agrees that wrongs have been committed in the past, but such wrongs cannot be the basis of disturbing peace of our present and future.

“India had a culturally rich history. It has been ruled over by numerous dynasties. During arguments, the counsel for plaintiff has vehemently argued on the point of national shame. However, nobody has denied that wrongs were committed in the past, but such wrongs cannot be the basis for disturbing peace of our present and future”, observed Civil Judge (South) Neha Sharma at Saket court.

The plaintiffs had argued, “the right to worship has been bestowed under Article 25 and 26 as a fundamental right”, which the court held was “devoid of merits”. The court held that “fundamental rights enshrined under Article 25 and 26 of the Constitution are not absolute in nature”. It further said, “It is an admitted fact that the suit property is a mosque built over temples and is not being used for any religious purpose, no prayers/namaz is being offered in the suit property”.

The court held that the plaintiffs did not have the right to demand the restoration of the temple due to the Places of Worship Act 1991 which was enacted to preserve the “secular fabric” of the nation.

“Our country has a rich history and has seen challenging times. Nevertheless, history has to be accepted as a whole. Can the good be retained and bad be deleted from our history? Thus, harmonious interpretation of both the statutes is required to give full force to the objective behind the Places of Worship Act, 1991,” the court said.

It further said that “such ancient and historical monuments cannot be used for some purpose which runs counter to its nature as a religious place of worship, but it can always be used for some other purpose which is not inconsistent with its religious character”.

Interestingly, the Court admitted that the Mosque was indeed built over the desecrated ruins of temples. The Court said that it is an admitted fact that the suit property is a mosque built over a temple but it is not being used for any religious purpose and no namaz is being offered there. “Hence, in my considered opinion, once a monument has been declared to be a protected monument and is owned by the government, then the plaintiffs cannot insist that the place of worship must actually and actively be used for religious services,” the court said.

Qutubudin Aibak destroyed Hindu and Jain temples, along with their deities: Petition

“Qutubdin Aibak, a commander of Mohammed Gauri dismantled/ destroyed Shree Vishnu Hari temple and 27 Jain and Hindu temples along with constellations of respective deities and raised some inner constructions within the temple complex,” the plea said. 

The petition further stated that Qutubdin Aibak did not completely demolish the existing temples and build Quwwatul Islam Masjid by using materials from the temples, adding that there are still pictures of Hindu gods and deities like Ganesh, Vishnu, Yaksha and symbols like Kalash, temple wells and sacred lotus in the mosque.

“Only the faces of gods and deities are defaced, the rest of the sculptures are identifiable. The corridor is completely of Vedic style having rectangular galleries with the holy symbol engraved pillars,” the petitioner said.

Petitioner demanded the court to create a trust to hand over the management and administration

The petitioner has sought a mandatory injunction directing the Central government to create a trust, according to the Trust Act, 1882, and hand over the management and administration of the temple complex situated within the area of the Qutub complex.

“Decree be passed in the nature of mandatory injunction, directing the Trust, to be created by Central government, to manage the affairs of 27 Hindu and Jain temples with iron pillar, in accordance with the scheme of administration framed by the Central government,” the petition said.

The litigant also sought a decree to be passed in the nature of a permanent injunction, restraining the defendants permanently from interfering in making necessary repair works, raising construction and making arrangements for pooja, darshan and worship of deities.

The court has essentially agreed that a historic wrong was committed and that indeed the mosque was built over desecrated temples, however, the court refused to admit the petition because it was scared of “disturbing peace”. In this scenario, the only thing that would “disturb peace” is the Muslim community running riots or committing violence if the historic wrongs were indeed rectified. One has to ask the question as to why the current Muslim community would commit violence if established historic wrongs, like mosques being built by desecrating temples.

The lack of law and order and the fact that the state cannot control an intolerant minority should not mean that Hindus and the other, real minority, Jains, should not have the right to demand that wrongs committed against them and their faith be rectified. The law enforcement agencies, the government and the judiciary should ideally focus on maintaining law and order and not denying the rectification of historic wrongs.

References:

opindia.com - OpIndia Staff