Saharanpur mosque demolition: Allahabad HC seeks UP govt’s reply, ₹6.41 crore compensation remains – what’s going on? | Today’s news

The Allahabad High Court on Friday asked the Uttar Pradesh government to file a reply within three weeks to a plea against the eviction and demolition of a mosque located in the Collectorate’s premises in Saharanpur.

According to Live Law, the High Court also stayed enforcement ₹6.41 crore fine as damages imposed by the Saharanpur Municipal Magistrate on the mosque management.

Read also | Saharanpur mosque demolition: Why it sparked a political storm | Explained

Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal fixed October 12 as the next date of hearing.

“Until the next date of inclusion, the realization of the damages imposed by the order of the Municipality of Saharanpur vide dated 16.7.2026 remains suspended,” reads the court’s order according to the report.

What happened?

The order was passed on a petition by advocate Mohammad Tanveer Ahmad challenging the direction of the Saharanpur Municipal Magistrate on July 16 as well as the order of the District Magistrate on September 2, news agency PTI reported.

The motion challenged proceedings brought under Section 5 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act 1971 in relation to the mosque.

The petition named the Government of Uttar Pradesh through the District Magistrate of Saharanpur and Abdul Hamid, Manager/Maulavi of the mosque, as respondents.

Read also | BJP Saharanpur unit chief resigns amid sexual exploitation allegations

On July 16, the city’s municipality ordered the demolition of a 315-square-meter mosque in the collector’s area and imposed a fine ₹6.41 million on its management. The order was passed under the Uttar Pradesh Public Spaces (Evictions and Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1972.

An appeal was filed against the magistrate’s decision to the district court. However, the district judge dismissed the appeal on September 2.

Following this, the authorities demolished the mosque on September 5.

‘Well found under a demolished mosque’

During the removal of the debris after the demolition, a well, approximately 20 feet deep and 1.5 meters wide, with iron sheets was found.

After the discovery, Sadar Sub-Divisional Magistrate Subodh Kumar said, according to PTI, that an ASI team will examine the well to find out its age and historical background.

The demolition sparked a political controversy, with opposition parties including the Samajwadi Party and the Congress criticizing the BJP-led state government for the action.

Read also | Uttar Pradesh: A 15-year-old unique mango tree in Saharanpur has 121 varieties

Vikas Tyagi, a former Bajrang Dal advisor and complainant in the matter, claimed that a temple might have existed at the site before the mosque was built.

However, Congress MP Imran Masood said the well was part of the mosque and was used in earlier times to meet the water requirement for wuzu, or ablution before prayers.

“ASI officials measured the depth of the well after placing a ladder inside and examined its interior. As part of the investigation, they also conducted photography and filming and collected samples of soil and brick debris from inside the well,” Kumar said.

Who are the property owners?

Senior advocate Ashish Kumar Singh, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, said that the eviction order was passed without ascertaining the title, though the name of Wahid Khan and Yaqub Khan were recorded on the land.

Before the high court, Singh, for the petitioners, said that the state had acted hastily in demolishing the mosque and that the demolition took place within three days of the eviction order.

It was submitted that the original owners of the land were Yaqub Khan and Wahid Khan and that the land was being used as waqf by the users of the mosque. The petitioner argued that the courts below failed to consider these aspects while recording their findings against him, Live Law said.

Read also | SC rejects plea to extend Waqf period, says applicants must approach tribunal

Additional Solicitor General Manish Goel opposed the petition saying that the petitioner himself had argued that the mosque was a waqf property and the Sunni Central board was not involved.

Goel argued that the position of the petitioner is opposite – because on one hand he claimed that the property belongs to the zamindar and on the other hand he said that the property is waqf but there is nothing about devoting himself to waqf, he argued.

Goel said the property is registered in the name of the collector katchera. The petition alleged that the disputed property was recorded in the name of one Wahid Khan in the documents. However, in 1956, it was recorded in the name of Wahid Khan, collector katchery and one Yaqub Khan.

He said the authorities failed to take this into account and issued the impugned order stating that the records were fraudulent and no proof of ownership had been submitted.

It was also argued that the Court of Appeal had wrongly held that the land was owned by the federal government during the British period and then vested in the state.

It was also stated that the mosque is registered in the waqf register, but this was not taken into account.

(With inputs from ANI, PTI)