Misuse of Jama Masjid: HC hauls up Imam Bukhari, Centre, Delhi govt
Press Trust of India Posted online: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 at 1403 hours IST Updated: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 at 1445 hours IST
New Delhi, November 6: The Delhi High Court has sought replies from the Centre and Lt Governor of Delhi on a petition alleging that terrorists and anti-social elements were taking shelter in the Jama Masjid here and the monument was being used as private property by Shahi Imam Ahmed Bukhari.
±Issuing notices to the Union Urban Development Ministry, Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), Imam Bukhari and Delhi Wakf Board, a bench comprising Justice Anil Dev Singh and Justice R S Sodhi asked them to file replies by November 27.
Notices were also issued to Delhi Development Authority, Municipal Corporation of Delhi and police commissioner by the court observing that violation of law could not be permitted "whosoever the person might be". A public interest litigation (PIL) by one Raisuddin, a resident of the Walled City, who alleged that "respondent number 8 (Ahmed Bukhari) and his father had started using the surrounding areas (of the mosque) for their private use and all sorts of illegal activities, bazaars, terrorist activities and unsocial elements take shelter in this monument".
The petitioner alleged that mafias operating in the area were trying to grab the land of the Jama Masjid, built by Mughal emperor Shah Jahan and declared as a protected monument by ASI for preservation as a structure of great architectural importance. Accusing DDA, MCD and police officials of "patronising the mafias", the PIL said "there is hardly any open space Left in the mosque's surroundings as the same had been fully encroached upon by anti-social elements in collusion with Bukhari who is getting huge money from them."
Stating that the unauthorised constructions around the mosque were defacing its features, the PIL said this was not only causing problems to thousands of devotees coming for prayers there every day but also presenting it in bad taste to tourists, especially the foreigners who visit the area to have a glimpse of the beautiful structure.
When Delhi government counsel V K Shali submitted that it was difficult to take action considering the "volatile nature" of the area where "riots" could take place on a slightest incident, the court said "if the authorities tend to implement the law sincerely their action would not be opposed". "If they could not enforce the law and order, then they have no business to remain there," the court observed.
Petitioner's counsel R K Mansal said that the court had earlier issued a series of directions to clear the area of all unauthorised constructions but DDA and MCD despite giving assurances in this regard "have failed" to take action on one pretext or the other. "Some vested interest under political patronage prevailed upon the dda in abandoning its programme for demolition and under pressure it invariably took the plea that the area is a sensitive one and no drastic action is possible," he said. Reminding the court that in 1975-76 a massive demolition operation was carried out by the government around the mosque despite strong opposition from the then Imam Syed Abdullah Bukhari, the PIL said the authorities then had enforced the law for preserving the surroundings as "green and open area".
But during past two decades the entire area was allowed to be encroached upon again by the same authorities, which earlier had cleared it, the PIL said.
