The Gujarat High Court has sought a response from the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) on a petition seeking to have Bharuch’s 14th-century Jami Masjid declared a Jain-Hindu temple and to allow worship by members of Jain and Hindu communities at the protected monument.
The petitioners have asked the court to direct the ASI to change the monument’s entry in its list, rename it Ashwabodh Tirth and Shakunika Vihar, and permit puja on the premises. They have also sought interim measures to seal and protect alleged religious symbols, artefacts and idols at the site while allowing devotees to worship there.
According to the submissions reported before the court, the petitioners contend that the ASI has incorrectly identified the monument as a Jami Masjid in its records since 1909. Their lawyer argued that the structure has the characteristics of a Jain-Hindu temple and cited historical books in support of the claim that Princess Sudharshana Kumar, daughter of King Vijaybaahu, built the temple in ancient times.
The petitioners also referred to evidence that allegedly emerged in June, including the presence of idols in the basement, particularly an idol of Jain Tirthankar Mallinath. They submitted photographs and a video clip to support their claims. The petitioners further alleged that some pillars had been damaged after the alleged discovery and expressed concern that the idols could be destroyed or desecrated.
The ASI’s lawyer, Ankit Shah, told the court that an idol had been found on the premises. He said the agency’s responsibility was to maintain and preserve the monument, while ensuring that worship took place was the responsibility of the state government. Government pleader GH Virk said that if an idol had been found, the monument deserved protection, adding that the idol and the structure should be safeguarded after certain pillars were damaged following the circulation of the video.
The petitioners questioned how the ASI and the state government could allow namaz to be held at the monument every Friday if, as they claimed, it was a Jain-Hindu temple. The issue therefore involves not only the monument’s recorded identity but also the division of responsibilities between the ASI, which protects monuments of national importance, and the state government, which is responsible for maintaining order and managing activity around the site.
Justice Nisha Thakore noted that the petitioners had invoked the High Court’s extraordinary jurisdiction without first approaching the relevant authority. The court directed the ASI’s counsel to obtain complete instructions on the submissions made in the petition. The matter will be taken up for further hearing on Tuesday.
