ASI defends Bhojshala survey, MPHC reserves verdict

Indore: The Indore bench of the Madhya Pradesh high court on Tuesday reserved the verdict on the Bhojshala-Kamal Maula Mosque case after the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) concluded its argument defending its survey.

The ASI told the bench that it had followed court directives and applied scientific methods without religious partiality.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Sunil Kumar Jain represented ASI before the bench of Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla and Justice Alok Awasthi on the 21st day of regular hearings into the Bhojshala-Kamal Maula Mosque dispute, which ended with the court reserving its verdict in the disputed matter over worship rights at the site.

Jain took direct aim at allegations raised by advocate Ashhar Warsi, counsel for an intervener, that the ASI report lacked neutrality and favoured petitioner Hindu Front for Justice. “The arguments advanced to this extent are based on baseless claims,” Jain said, asserting that ASI had placed before the court only what the court-supervised survey yielded. He pointed to the composition of the expert committee — which included three Muslim members along with representatives of all contesting parties — as evidence of the survey’s impartial character.

On the respondent Maulana Kamaluddin Welfare Society’s charge that carbon dating was not conducted to determine the age of the structure, Jain said the test applies only to organic matter and cannot be used on stone. “Other procedures suggested could only be used to establish the age of the stone, not the structure. Thus, the age was determined on the basis of stylistic grounds and palaeography,” he said.

He listed the scientific methods employed — ground penetrating radar surveys, handheld X-ray fluorescence analysis, mortar composition studies, and examination of basalt stones and bricks found at the site — noting that the X-ray fluorescence revealed distinct layered patterns distinguishing old construction from new.

On the society’s allegation that a plastic bottle unearthed during excavation was concealed, Jain said the item was both photographed and recorded in the survey report, having surfaced during debris clearance in the upper layer.

Addressing the society’s characterisation of a water tank at the centre of the complex as a “wuzu pond” — a term used by senior advocate Salman Khurshid appearing for the society — Jain presented photographs to the court, contending that the tank was constructed above ground level, a feature absent in the wuzu pond photographs submitted by the society itself. Scientific examination, he said, established that the construction along the outer perimeter of the square tank was comparatively recent.

Jain also disputed the claim that a statue of Buddha was recovered from the site, stating it belonged to Jain iconography.

On the society’s RTI-based allegation that ASI could not account for the origin of excavated artefacts catalogued as figures A1 to A18, the ASG said the items were recovered during excavations, preserved at various locations, and documented in the last survey, even though no earlier ASI records were available for them.

With all contenders having concluded their arguments, the bench reserved its verdict.

GFX

- Bench had clubbed following petitions:

Writ petitions - by Hindu Front For Justice, Maulana Kamaluddin Welfare Society, Antar Singh and others, Kuldeep Tiwari and Salekh Chand Jain

Writ Appeal — Qazi Zakiullah

A number of IAs were also heard during the 21 days of trial.