Hindu party files caveat in SC in Bhojshala complex dispute case

A Hindu party has filed a caveat in the Supreme Court. This follows a Madhya Pradesh High Court ruling. The court declared the Bhojshala complex a temple for Goddess Saraswati. It also cancelled an ASI order from 2003. This order had permitted Mus...

Dhar Bhojshala site temple of Goddess Saraswati, says MP High Court: Adv Vishnu Jain gives details
New Delhi: A Hindu party on Friday filed a caveat in the Supreme Court saying no orders be passed without hearing it on any appeal against the Madhya Pradesh High Court order in the Bhojshala complex dispute case.

The caveat, filed by Jitendra Singh 'Vishen' through advocate Barun Kumar Sinha, said, "Let no order be made in the above matter without notice to the undersigned."

Vishen was the sixth petitioner in the matter in which a high court bench in Indore on Friday gave the decision.


In a huge win for the Hindu side, the Madhya Pradesh High Court declared that the disputed Bhojshala complex in Dhar district was a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati, and the Centre and the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) can decide on its administration and management.

The high court also quashed the April 7, 2003, order of the ASI that allowed Muslims to offer namaz inside the Bhojshala complex every Friday.

The high court bench hearing the case also said that the Muslim community, which called the 11th century, ASI-protected monument 'Kamal Maula Mosque', may approach the Madhya Pradesh government for allotment of separate land in the district for the construction of a mosque.
Download
The Economic Times Business News App
for the Latest News in Business, Sensex, Stock Market Updates & More.
Download
The Economic Times News App
for Quarterly Results, Latest News in ITR, Business, Share Market, Live Sensex News & More.
READ MORE
ADVERTISEMENT

READ MORE:

LOGIN & CLAIM

50 TIMESPOINTS

More from our Partners

Loading next story
Business News › News › India › Hindu party files caveat in SC in Bhojshala complex dispute case
Text Size:AAA
Success
This article has been saved

*

+