The controversial “survey” of a mosque in the small north Indian town of Sambhal, in the state of Uttar Pradesh, sparked violent protests last month, leaving at least five people dead. The incident reignited the age-old debate over the need to “correct mistakes” committed centuries ago and their impact on social harmony and peace in contemporary India.
At the heart of the debate is the demand that the Indian state take responsibility for historical events that occurred during medieval times, “respect” the wishes of the Hindu majority, and restore religious sites allegedly seized during Muslim rule and converted into mosques.
The laws of the land, including the Constitution of India, however, reject such arguments. They assert that events preceding the establishment of the Republic cannot affect the nation’s secular character, and guarantee equal protection to all religions, regardless of their size or influence.
India’s present ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its parent organization, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) – loosely translated as the National Volunteers’ Organization –champion an ideology of Hindu revivalism that conflicts with the constitutional definition of secularism and promotes a revisionist interpretation of history. They support the idea of “restorative justice,” despite the inherent risks of fueling social and religious conflict. The dubious 2019 judgment by India’s highest court in the most prominent of these disputes, the Babri Mosque, now the Ayodhya Temple, has further strengthened the revivalist movement, raising new claims every now and then, testing the country’s secular fabric.
The Sambhal example
The dispute is yet another manifestation of majoritarian politics pursued by the ruling BJP. Sambhal, a Muslim-majority town in western Uttar Pradesh, is home to the Shahi Jama Masjid, a centuries-old mosque considered one of the finest examples of Islamic architecture in India. Until the recent controversy erupted in November, the mosque was largely unknown to most Indians.
On November 19, a civil court in Sambhal ordered a survey of the mosque based on a petition filed by individuals allegedly affiliated with the RSS, claiming that the mosque was built by Mughal emperor Babar (1483–1530) in 1526 after demolishing a temple. Babar, the founder of the Mughal dynasty in India, replaced the reign of the Delhi Sultanate (1200-1526) and is attributed with building prominent mosques, including the Babri Mosque in Ayodhya, which was demolished in 1992 by a mob allegedly led by BJP/RSS leaders and other like-minded organizations. Historians assert that the Sambhal mosque was actually constructed by Hindu Baig, an official under Babar.
The November 19 civil suit in the local court claimed the mosque was built over Shri Harihar Temple, dedicated to an avatar of Lord Shiva. Despite its status as a protected site under the Archeological Survey of India (ASI), governed through the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1956, the court ordered the survey to proceed.
While the first survey was conducted without major incident, a second survey ordered on November 24 met with objections from local Muslims, eventually leading to the violence.
The controversy surrounding the Sambhal mosque, like others of its kind, is rooted in myths and what historians such as Ram Puniyani describe as “make-believe” history. This manufactured narrative has become a recurring pattern, repeated in over a dozen similar cases across India.
Seeking Temples under the Mosques
There are at least twelve such cases currently ongoing across India. Similar claims have been made in the context of the famous Sufi shrine Ajmer Sharif Dargah in Rajasthan, a mosque in Badaun (also in Uttar Pradesh), Baba Budan Giri Dargah in Karnataka, in addition to the more prominent cases involving the Gyanwapi mosque in Varanasi and the Shahi Idgah in Mathura.
The pattern, first set in motion during the Babri Masjid case, is consistent across all these disputes. At Ayodhya, it was claimed that the mosque had been built after demolishing a temple dedicated to Lord Rama, believed to be born at the same site. This claim was based solely on a vague observation by a colonial authority, and repeated excavations by archaeologists have found no evidence to support it.
After years of claims and counterclaims, in the 1950s an idol was suddenly placed inside the mosque in Ayodhya overnight. It was reported at the time that locals, in collaboration with local officials, had placed the idol. Despite this, the government decided to shut the mosque and suspend Muslim prayers until a legal resolution was reached, rather than removing the idol, fearing backlash from the majority community.
This set a precedent for miscreants, often led by RSS supporters, to replicate the act in other locations, a practice that continues even today. In essence, it is typically some “fringe” element that raises the issue. They then receive full support from state authorities as well as favorable coverage from the media. Eventually, the courts give in and order “surveys,” despite India having a law called The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, which prevents such litigations by maintaining the status quo for all religious structures built before August 15, 1947.
Former Chief Justice of India’s Supreme Court, D.Y. Chandrachud played a crucial role in the advancement of such litigations. In a reversal of his own judgment in the 2019 Babri Masjid case, where the 1991 act was upheld and the Babri was deemed as an “exception,” he permitted a “survey” of the Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi. His argument was that the 1991 Act does not prevent ascertaining the nature of a religious establishment. This reasoning has led to a flood of petitions seeking surveys of religious sites across the country.
Divide and Rule
For many, the root of the issue is not religious but political. Abdul Rahman, a journalist based in Delhi, argues that these disputes, grounded in a peculiar reading of history, keep society polarized along religious lines, with the majority feeling victimized and minorities perpetually insecure.
This serves a dual purpose for the ruling party. It allows it to maintain control by diverting public attention from pressing economic and social issues, preventing voters from holding the government accountable. It also positions the party as the sole defender of the majority’s religious interests. Other political parties are often trapped in a predicament where they must take stances that can make them appear hostile to the majority’s religious concerns, Rahman points out.
The movement around the Babri Mosque was the archetype that helped the BJP build a political base in northern India, where it was a very small force before the 1990s. Seeing the political potential of such issues, the BJP has expanded its use, making similar claims in states like Karnataka, in the south. It often extends support to similar movements as seen in the case of Charminar in Hyderabad, sensing political benefits, even if it was not the original proponent.
A prominent lawyer practicing in India’s highest court, speaking anonymously, told Reset DOC that the failure of the court to take punitive action against those responsible for the “criminal” act of demolishing the Babri mosque – many of whom are leaders of the ruling party – has emboldened the party and its activists to continue promoting a disruptive narrative that keeps society perpetually polarized.
However, the lawyer disagrees with the observation that the BJP is solely using the issue for political gain. He argues that is more of an ideological commitment that derives from the BJP now more than ever, because it can use its control over the state institutions to fulfill its core agenda. The BJP’s slogan, “Ye to Keval Jhankhi hai, Kashi-Mathura Baki hai” (“This is just the beginning, Varanasi and Mathura will be next”), coined after the demolition of the Babri Mosque, underscores this, he says. The movement surrounding temples is part of the larger RSS ideology, which views Muslims in India as invaders who, during their rule, committed atrocities against Hindus and Hindu culture. Restoring the temples, they argue, would rebuild Hindu self-confidence and is therefore essential for Hindu revivalism.
Abhijan Choudhury is a Delhi based journalist. He mostly writes on politics, national and international affairs.
Cover photo: A general view shows the Shahi Idgah mosque, on the left, and the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple, on the right, in Mathura on April 26, 2024. Mathura is one of several locations across India’s northern heartlands where activists have sought to replace centuries-old Islamic monuments with Hindu temples. (Photo by Money Sharma / AFP)
Subscribe to our newsletter
