Shimla mosque row: The court has asked the Waqf Board and the mosque committee to explain how the original single-floor mosque in Himachal Pradesh's Shimla had expanded into a five-storey structure. It also sought a status report on the construction of the building.
A large number of protesters demanding the demolition of illegal portions of a mosque in Shimla’s Sanjauli area took to the streets and clashed with the police on September 11 (Wednesday), breaking barricades during the massive protest in Himachal Pradesh.
Carrying the Tricolour and raising slogans like ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ and ‘Hindu Ekta Zindabad’, the protesters marched towards Sanjauli to lodge their protest and demand the demolition of a portion of the five-floor mosque.
Police had to use mild lathi-charge and water cannons to disperse the crowds as they tried to remove the barricades at the Dhalli tunnel. Later, they staged a sit-in protest, blocking the road leading to Sanjauli and dispersed. Several policemen were injured in the clash with an equal number of protesters.
“Our only demand is demolition of the unauthorised disputed structure and to protect the demography of the state,” a protester said.
Section 163 imposed in Shimla's Sanjauli
The local administration has imposed Section 163 of the BNSS of 2023 which bars the assembly of more than five people without permission and the carrying of arms.
How was the matter of Shimla mosque aggravated?
Several Hindu organisations have been demanding the demolition of unauthorised constructions in the mosque and the registration of outsiders coming to Himachal Pradesh. The protesters have also been demanding that the antecedents of local Muslims be verified by the police as they suspect some of them to be 'Rohingyas' or 'Bangladeshis'.
The Shimla Municipal Corporation Commissioner’s court on September 7 heard the matter relating to illegal portions of the mosque and listed it for the next hearing on October 5. It asked the Waqf Board and the mosque committee to explain how it became a five-storey structure from just one floor earlier.
According to Rahul Sharma, who appeared for the civic body, it is a case of illegal construction and the Waqf Board has been made a party to this.
“We have filed for a reply and they submitted their replies,” he said.
The Waqf Board, in its reply, said the land on which the mosque stands belongs to it and the extended construction was carried out in line with the rules. However, it failed to provide documents that authorised it to raise the structure.
Insisting that the dispute was not about ownership but about the development of the shrine, State Waqf Board officer Kutubuddin Ahmed said that in 2023 they had received a notice from the Shimla Municipal Corporation.
Waqf Board failed to provide ownership rights to shrine
However, the counsel for the protesters Jagat Pal said the Waqf Board has failed to provide ownership rights to the shrine.
“As per the records of the Revenue Department, the state government is the owner of the land. The construction is unauthorised as it is government-owned land,” he said.
As per Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Minister Anirudh Singh, the mosque has been built on government land and the dispute of the property has been pending in a court for almost 14 years.
Himachal CM appeals to maintain law and order in state
Himachal Pradesh Chief Minister Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu has appealed to the people not to give the issue a political colour and maintain law and order.
Jai Ram Thakur slams Congress govt in Himachal Pradesh
However, Leader of Opposition (LoP) and BJP former chief minister Jai Ram Thakur has slammed the government, saying the state was delaying action against the alleged illegal construction.
Case heard over 40 times but no conclusion was drawn
Maulvi Shahzad Imam said the structure dates back to 1947 while the extended construction took place after 2010. A case relating to raising illegal construction in the mosque was registered in 2010 and since then four floors were added to the single-story structure. According to media reports, the case was heard 44 times by the municipal corporation without any resolution.
The report further claimed that the extended structure came up during the past decade under successive governments.
