Indore, May 11 (PTI): The Muslim side in the disputed Bhojshala temple-Kamal Maula mosque complex case on Monday told the Madhya Pradesh High Court that the Archaeological Survey of India survey report was “biased” and prepared to support the claims of the Hindu petitioners. Senior advocate Salman Khurshid and advocate Tausif Warsi, representing the Maulana Kamaluddin Welfare Society, presented their objections to the survey report to Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla and Justice Alok Awasthi of the Indore bench of the high court.
The Hindu community considers Bhojshala in Dhar to be a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati, while the Muslim side calls the monument the Kamal Maula Mosque. The disputed complex is protected by the ASI.
The objections filed by the Maulana Kamaluddin Welfare Society of Dhar stated that the ASI used the term “Bhojshala Temple” throughout its survey report, even though there is no historical evidence to prove that the disputed complex ever existed as a “Bhojshala Temple.” The objections stated that such terminology reflects the ASI’s “bias”.
The Muslim side claimed that the ASI ignored historical texts and its own records, and that the findings of its survey report had no legal basis.
The Maulana Kamaluddin Welfare Society stated that the ASI did not provide it with complete videography and colour photographs of the survey. The objections claimed that many of the video clips provided were no longer than 45 seconds.
Lawyers for the Muslim side said that the ASI’s survey report failed to prove that the Kamal Maula Mosque was built by demolishing any other religious structure.
The Hindu Front for Justice, one of the petitioners, claims that Bhojshala was originally a Saraswati temple established in 1034 by King Bhoj of the Parmar dynasty, which was demolished in 1305 during Alauddin Khilji’s invasion of the Malwa region.
The Muslim side refuted this, stating that the ASI report makes no clear mention of a monument like Bhojshala or any structure built by any king of the Parmar dynasty.
Arguing on behalf of the Maulana Kamaluddin Welfare Society, Khurshid said that the Supreme Court had directed that no “physical excavation” be carried out that could alter the appearance of the disputed monument, but in violation of this, the ASI team excavated the mosque complex.
He said that the ASI claimed to have recovered several artefacts from under a single slab in the disputed complex, but video clips also showed items such as paper, plastic bottles, and cups. The Muslim side’s lawyer called this a “mere show”.
“Plastic was not invented in the 13th or 14th century,” Khurshid said.
The senior advocate also said that the recovered artefacts appeared to be in clean condition and were not covered in soil. He argued that if these objects had been buried for centuries, they would certainly have been covered in soil.
Khurshid said that the high court had directed carbon dating (the scientific process of determining the age of archaeological objects or remains) in its order, but the ASI did not conduct this process.
He claimed that a statue of Gautam Buddha was also found during the ASI’s survey of the disputed complex, but it was not mentioned in the report.
The hearing in the case will continue on Tuesday.
The high court has been regularly hearing five petitions and one writ appeal filed since April 6 regarding the religious nature of the Bhojshala Temple-Kamal Maula Masjid complex.
The court directed the ASI to conduct a scientific survey of the Bhojshala Temple-Kamal Maula Masjid complex on March 11, 2024. The ASI began surveying the complex on March 22, 2024. After a detailed 98-day survey, the ASI submitted its report to the High Court on July 15, 2024.
The ASI’s more than 2,000-page report indicates that a massive structure dating back to the reign of the Parmar kings of Dhar existed at the site, and the current structure was built from the remains of temples. PTI HWP MAS SKY SKY
(This story is published as part of the auto-generated syndicate wire feed. No editing has been done in the headline or the body by ABP Live.)
