The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday denied requests to reinstate Friday prayers at the Bhojshala-Kamal Maula complex in Dhar district, Madhya Pradesh, following a ruling by the Madhya Pradesh High Court that classified the site as a Hindu temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati. Instead, the court instructed the state government to designate an open space near the complex for Muslims to conduct Friday namaz between 1 p.m. and 3 p.m., pending a final resolution of the legal dispute. The court emphasized that it wished to avoid creating tensions in a highly sensitive religious and historical matter. The High Court had ruled in May that the complex, long disputed between Hindu and Muslim communities, was a temple and quashed a 2003 order by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) that permitted Muslims to offer prayers at the site on Fridays. The High Court also directed the ASI to oversee the site’s administration and conservation. The Supreme Court, however, did not immediately overturn this decision, instead opting for a temporary solution to manage the religious practices of both communities. The Supreme Court bench, led by Chief Justice Surya Kant and including Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, expressed concerns about potential unrest if Friday prayers were restored at the disputed site. As an alternative, the court mandated that the state provide an open space adjacent to the complex for Muslim worshippers. The arrangement is described as temporary and subject to the final outcome of the ongoing litigation. Additionally, the court prohibited the ASI from making any structural modifications to the site without explicit approval from the Supreme Court. The dispute centers on the religious identity of the Bhojshala-Kamal Maula complex, which has long been a point of contention. The Hindu community views the site as a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati, while the Muslim community claims it is a historic mosque built during the reign of Alauddin Khilji in the 13th or 14th century. In March 2024, the High Court ordered the ASI to investigate the site following a petition by the Hindu Front for Justice, which argued that the mosque was constructed by dismantling older Hindu structures. The ASI confirmed in July 2024 that the mosque used materials from earlier temples at the site. Following the Supreme Court’s directive, the district administration in Dhar attempted to locate a suitable site for Friday prayers. However, Muslim community representatives rejected a proposed location approximately 1.5 kilometers from the Bhojshala complex, arguing that it was too far from the disputed site. Local Muslim leaders, including Abdul Samad, demanded that the allocated site be closer to the complex, where Sufi gatherings had historically taken place. They expressed concern that the chosen location might be perceived as an attempt to displace the Muslim community from the vicinity. The district collector, Rajeev Ranjan Meena, defended the administration’s choice, stating that the selected site was suitable and near enough to prevent overcrowding and potential law-and-order issues near the Bhojshala complex. He noted that the administration would continue engaging with Muslim leaders to find a satisfactory arrangement for future Friday prayers. Meanwhile, some Hindu community members welcomed the Supreme Court’s interim directive, asserting that the Bhojshala complex should remain a temple and that the Muslim community should accept the judicial determination. Legal arguments presented in the Supreme Court underscored the complexity of the case. Senior advocate A.M. Singhvi, representing the Muslim petitioners, emphasized the importance of maintaining communal harmony and referenced the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act of 1991, which aims to prevent religious conversions and disputes over the identity of ancient sites. Another advocate, Huzeifa Ahmadi, criticized the High Court for deciding factual matters without cross-examining ASI officials whose reports supported the High Court’s ruling. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the government, stated that the High Court’s decision had already been partially implemented and that restoring the previous arrangement would create administrative challenges. The Supreme Court has scheduled further hearings on the matter, with the next session expected in early August. Until then, the interim arrangement for Friday prayers at a nearby site remains in effect, while the legal battle continues to unfold. The court has also indicated that it will examine whether the High Court was justified in determining the religious character of the site through writ proceedings, and whether such actions are permissible under the 1991 law.
5 articles
Scroll.inIndépendantCentreFactualité 95Objectivité 90il y a 7 jLa Cour suprême de l'Inde a refusé de rétablir les prières du vendredi (namaz) au complexe Bhojshala-Kamal Maula dans le Madhya Pradesh, qui est actuellement en litige entre les communautés hindoues et musulmanes.
Lecture du biais (Centre): L'article présente les procédures judiciaires et les décisions prises par divers tribunaux sans favoriser ouvertement la communauté hindoue ou musulmane.
Pourquoi factualité (95): The article faithfully represents the primary source, accurately detailing the court's decision to allow prayers near the site and the refusal to restore the previous status quo. It provides precise information about the court's composition and the nature of the petitions.
Pourquoi objectivité (90): The article remains neutral throughout, avoiding biased language and focusing on factual reporting. It presents the court's reasoning and directives without editorializing or showing clear favor towards either religious group.
Hindustan TimesIndépendantCentreFactualité 92Objectivité 90il y a 3 jLes musulmans de Dhar, en Inde, ont rejeté un site alloué par l'administration du district pour les prières du vendredi en raison de sa distance par rapport au complexe Bhojshala. La Cour suprême avait ordonné l'allocation d'un terrain "près" du complexe Bhojshala-Kamal Maula pour les prières du vendredi, mais l'administration a choisi un site situé à 1,5 km près de Chalees Peer, un sanctuaire. Les dirigeants communautaires soutiennent que cette décision tente de les déplacer de la région, tandis que l'administration affirme que le site est approprié et nécessaire pour éviter la congestion.
Lecture du biais (Centre): L'article présente les deux côtés du conflit - les préoccupations de la communauté musulmane et la justification administrative - avec un reportage équilibré.
Pourquoi factualité (92): The article provides detailed information about the refusal of the Muslim community to accept the allocated site for Friday prayers, including quotes from community leaders and specifics about the locations involved. These details are corroborated by other sources and align with the cross-source con
Pourquoi objectivité (90): The article presents the situation from the perspective of the Muslim community and includes direct quotes from community leaders. While it does not explicitly favor one side over another, it focuses more on the Muslim community's response than on the broader legal or administrative implications, wh
The HinduIndépendantCentreFactualité 90Objectivité 85il y a 7 jLa Cour suprême de l'Inde a décidé de ne pas rétablir le statut précédent du complexe de la mosquée Bhojshala-Kamal Maula, qui était auparavant utilisé à la fois pour le culte hindou et les prières musulmanes. Suite à la décision de la Haute Cour du Madhya Pradesh selon laquelle le site est un temple dédié à la déesse Saraswati, la Cour suprême a demandé à l'État du Madhya Pradesh de fournir un espace ouvert alternatif aux fidèles musulmans pour effectuer temporairement les prières du vendredi jusqu'à ce que le cas soit résolu. La cour a souligné l'importance d'éviter les tensions sur la question "sensible" et a exhorté les deux parties à faire preuve de patience.
Lecture du biais (Centre): L'article présente les procédures judiciaires et les arguments des deux parties sans favoriser ouvertement un point de vue.
Pourquoi factualité (90): The article accurately captures the court's decision to refrain from restoring the status quo and direct a temporary prayer space. It includes the court's rationale about avoiding tension and the prohibition on ASI's actions, aligning well with the primary source.
Pourquoi objectivité (85): The article maintains a neutral stance, quoting the court's statements directly and avoiding emotionally charged language. It presents the situation objectively without apparent bias toward either religious group.
Hindustan TimesIndépendantCentreFactualité 90Objectivité 85il y a 7 j La Cour suprême refuse de rétablir le namaz à Bhojshala, ordonne la prière du vendredi dans un site voisinLa Cour suprême de l'Inde a rejeté une requête visant à rétablir les prières du vendredi au complexe Bhojshala-Kamal Maula Mosque-Temple à Dhar, qui a été déclaré temple hindou par une décision de la Haute Cour du Madhya Pradesh. La cour a ordonné que les musulmans soient autorisés à prier à un endroit proche tout en empêchant tout changement structurel du site par l'Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). Les juges ont souligné l'importance d'éviter les décisions qui pourraient perturber l'harmonie sociale et ont préféré traiter la question par le biais du processus d'appel plutôt que de délivrer un ordre intérimaire. Les pétitionnaires ont fait valoir que la décision de la Haute Cour avait ignoré les pratiques de longue date du culte musulman sur le site, tandis que le gouvernement a soutenu que la mise en œuvre de l'ancien arrangement entraînerait désormais des défis administratifs.
Lecture du biais (Centre): L'article présente un compte rendu équilibré des arguments juridiques des deux parties - les pétitionnaires plaidant en faveur de la liberté religieuse et le gouvernement mettant l'accent sur la faisabilité administrative.
Pourquoi factualité (90): The article closely aligns with the primary source, accurately reporting the court's refusal to restore namaz at the site and directing a nearby space for prayers. It includes specific timings and mentions the restriction on ASI's actions, which match the primary document.
Pourquoi objectivité (85): The article maintains a neutral tone, presenting facts without overtly favoring either side. It quotes the court's observations directly and avoids emotional language, making it relatively objective despite discussing a contentious issue.
Hindustan TimesIndépendantCentreFactualité 89Objectivité 93il y a 4 j Le collecteur sur la question de Bhojshala: "Je vais étudier l'ordre du SC, prendre les mesures appropriées"Le collecteur du district de Dhar au Madhya Pradesh a déclaré que l'administration examinera l'ordonnance récente de la Cour suprême sur le différend de Bhojshala avant de mettre en œuvre toute action visant à préserver la paix dans la région. La Cour suprême a téléchargé son ordre en ligne, et le collecteur a souligné que l'administration suivra attentivement les directives du tribunal.
Lecture du biais (Centre): L'article présente à la fois les perspectives hindoues et musulmanes sur le différend de Bhojshala et fait état de la réponse administrative à l'ordonnance de la Cour suprême.
Pourquoi factualité (89): The article accurately reports the Dhar Collector's statement about studying the Supreme Court's order before taking further action. It aligns with the cross-source consensus and provides relevant background on the ongoing legal proceedings.
Pourquoi objectivité (93): The article remains largely objective, focusing on the official statements from the district collector and quoting him directly. There is no evident bias or editorializing, though it briefly mentions a Hindu representative's comments, which adds a slight contextual nuance without affecting neutralit
★
Gardons l’information honnête.
ObjectiveNews est financé par ses lecteurs et sans publicité : nous vous montrons le biais au lieu de le cacher. Soutenez un journalisme indépendant pour 5 €/mois.
Devenir soutien
India
