The Delhi High Court, on Friday, expressed its displeasure at the authorities for not being able to produce a file containing the decision of the then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that the historic Mughal era Jama Masjid in the Capital be not declared a protected monument. “Instead of such record about the status of the mosque, current occupants, and other connected issues, only ‘loose sheets’ and other documents had been filed,” observed Justice Prathiba M Singh, heading the bench.
Giving a last chance, the court asked for an affidavit by a competent officer of the ASI along with the original file for the next hearing in October. The court ordered the director general of the ASI to deal with the matter directly, apart from holding a meeting with the counsel appearing on behalf of the central government, Anil Soni and Manish Mohan, to ensure the preparation of a proper affidavit.
The High Court was hearing public interest litigations seeking to declare Jama Masjid a protected monument and remove encroachments within and outside it. On August 28, the court ordered the Union Ministry of Culture and ASI to produce the file containing Singh’s decision on the mosque’s status.
During the hearing, the bench asked the official present from ASI, “Who is not giving the file? We will call the secretary. There are clear instructions.” The Bench showed its dissatisfaction with the documents produced and submitted, stating that they related mainly to the writ petition and did not contain fundamental information regarding the status of Jama Masjid as a monument, maintenance by ASI, and who the existing occupants were.
It directed that an informed officer of the ASI file an affidavit brief and to the point regarding all the relevant aspects of the case and “that the original file shall be produced at the next hearing along with the record, under the direct supervision of director general ASI.”.
Suhail Ahmed Khan and Ajay Gautam filed the PILs in 2014. The pleas questioned the title “Shahi Imam” used by the imam of Jama Masjid, Maulana Syed Ahmed Bukhari, and his appointment of his son as the naib (deputy) imam. The pleas also asked why the ASI is not managing the mosque.
The Centre’s counsel contended that the Jama Masjid is a living monument and out of bounds for the public with many restrictions. In August 2015, the ASI informed the court that Singh had assured the Shahi Imam that the Jama Masjid would not be declared a protected monument. The court was also informed that as the Jama Masjid was not categorized as a centrally-protected monument, it did not come within the purview of ASI.
The affidavit of ASI stated that in 2004, the issue of making Jama Masjid a centrally protected monument came up. Still, Singh had assured Shahi Imam by a letter dated October 20, 2004, that such a status would not be accorded to it.
