The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to stay the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s verdict in the long-running Bhojshala-Kamal Maula Mosque dispute, while agreeing to examine petitions filed by the Muslim side challenging the ruling. As an interim arrangement, the apex court directed the Madhya Pradesh government to provide an open space adjacent to the Bhojshala complex in Dhar for Muslims to offer Friday namaz between 1 pm and 3 pm until the matter is decided.
The bench also issued notices to the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the state government, seeking their responses to the appeals. In addition, the court directed that no structural changes should be made to the protected monument without its prior permission, aiming to preserve the status quo while the legal challenge is heard.
Interim Relief While Appeals Are Heard
The matter was heard by a bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana. During the proceedings, the court observed that the dispute concerns a place of immense historical and religious significance and therefore requires careful judicial scrutiny.
Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, appearing for the Muslim petitioners, argued that the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s decision had altered a long-standing arrangement under which Hindus and Muslims were allowed to worship at the site on different days. According to the petitioners, Friday namaz had been offered at the complex for years under the Archaeological Survey of India’s 2003 administrative order, which the High Court later set aside.
While the Supreme Court declined to suspend the High Court’s verdict at this stage, it sought to balance the interests of both communities by allowing Muslims to offer Friday prayers at an open space adjacent to the complex. The bench also indicated that it would endeavour to hear the matter expeditiously, recognising the sensitivity of the dispute and the need for an early resolution. The court emphasised that the interim arrangement should not be interpreted as expressing any opinion on the merits of either side’s claims.
A Decades-Old Dispute
The Bhojshala-Kamal Maula complex in Dhar has remained at the centre of competing religious claims for decades. Hindus believe the site to be the ancient Bhojshala, a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati, while Muslims regard it as the Kamal Maula Mosque, where Friday prayers have traditionally been offered. In May this year, the Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that the complex is a temple and quashed the ASI’s 2003 order that had allowed Muslims to offer Friday namaz at the premises while permitting Hindu worship on other days.
The High Court further directed that the management and administration of the protected monument be vested in the Central government and the Archaeological Survey of India. The Muslim side challenged this verdict before the Supreme Court, contending that it overlooked historical evidence and disrupted a long-standing arrangement that had enabled members of both communities to access the site.
By seeking responses from the ASI and the Madhya Pradesh government while ensuring that no structural alterations take place, the Supreme Court has signalled its intent to carefully examine the legal, historical and constitutional issues involved before delivering its final verdict.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
Places of worship often carry layers of history, faith and identity that extend far beyond legal ownership, making such disputes particularly sensitive in a diverse democracy like India. Courts have an important responsibility to adjudicate these matters impartially while ensuring that public order and constitutional rights are protected throughout the process.
The Supreme Court’s interim arrangement reflects an attempt to maintain peace without prejudging the competing claims before it. As the legal proceedings continue, it is equally important for political leaders, community representatives and citizens to refrain from inflammatory rhetoric and allow the judicial process to take its course.
India’s rich cultural heritage is strengthened not by deepening divisions, but by fostering dialogue, mutual respect and coexistence among communities with shared histories. Can legal processes and community dialogue together help transform disputes over shared heritage into opportunities for greater understanding and harmony?
Also Read: Your Metro Ride Could Cost ₹2,500 If You Ignore This New Chennai Metro Rule on Loud Music and Videos
Supreme Court agreed to hear the #Bhojshala dispute on a day-to-day basis to resolve the issue.
— All India Radio News (@airnewsalerts) July 14, 2026
However, the bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana declined the petitioners' request for an interim order restoring the… pic.twitter.com/uqjx84wMvV
