The Supreme Court on Tuesday (July 14, 2026) refrained from restoring status quo ante after the Madhya Pradesh High Court declared that the Bhojshala-Kamal Maula Mosque complex was a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati and barred Friday namaaz at the site.
The court reasoned that it did not want to “create tension” in a “very sensitive” issue.
A three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, as an alternative, asked the State of Madhya Pradesh to identify an open space near the disputed site for the Muslim community to offer namaaz on Fridays between 1 p.m. and 3 p.m. as an ad hoc measure till the case is finally decided by the top court.
The Bench further prohibited the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) from allowing any structural alterations to be made to the disputed structure without the prior permission of the apex court. The court issued formal notice to the State of Madhya Pradesh and the Union government.
“Let us not pass any order which creates tension. We are ready to hear the case on a day-to-day basis and resolve the issue. We request both sides to have patience. It is only a matter of a few days,” Chief Justice Kant assured the Muslim appellants.
Urging the court to pass an interim order of status quo, senior advocate A.M. Singhvi, for the appellants, said “fraternity” seemed to be the “most forgotten word” in recent times. He said statues like the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act of 1991 were enacted to stop exactly situations like this from emerging when religious places from antiquity were at risk of losing their identity.
“The 1991 Act was meant to stop this eye-for-an-eye… Somebody has sought a survey of the Taj Mahal. This would never stop unless the 1991 Act is strictly adhered to… Ayodhya was a one-time exception,” Mr. Singhvi submitted.
He said the Bhojshala had once been a site to showcase harmony with namaaz held along with Basant Panchami.
Senior advocate Huzeifa Ahmadi, also for the appellants, said the declaration was made on a writ petition. Facts were highly disputable and the persons who prepared the ASI reports banked by the High Court were not cross-examined, he said.
Mr. Ahmadi said the High Court’s judgment had acknowledged the disputed site as a centuries’ old mosque, and the balance of convenience lay in favour of status quo ante.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the government side, said the High Court decision was in May. The appeals have come up after two months now.
“We have ensured that both communities keep calm,” Mr. Mehta said.
The Chief Justice made a request to the senior advocates, reminding them that the issue was “very sensitive”, and comments made in court should not be misinterpreted outside.
“If namaaz has been offered for the past 800 years, why should it be stopped now? If parties have been worshipping jointly since a settlement arrived at in 1995, why cannot it be continued till Your Lordships decide?” senior advocate Meenakshi Arora, also for the appellants, said.
On May 15, the Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that the disputed Bhojshala-Kamal Maula Mosque complex in Dhar district was a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati. It had simultaneously quashed a decades-old ASI order that had allowed the Muslim community to offer Friday prayers at the site. The High Court had also said that the Centre and the ASI could decide on the Bhojshala complex’s administration and management.
The Hindu community considers Bhojshala a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati, while the Muslim side calls the 11th-century monument the Kamal Maula Mosque. The disputed complex is protected by the ASI.
Published - July 14, 2026 02:20 pm IST