ASI report at centre of Bhojshala dispute hearing:Debate intensifies over validity of historical documents; Jain side reiterates Gurukul claim

The Madhya Pradesh government on Thursday told the Indore bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court that several findings in the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) survey report indicate that the disputed Bhojshala site was originally a Saraswati temple. During the hearing in the Bhojshala case, Advocate General Prashant Singh, appearing for the state government, cited excerpts from the ASI survey report and argued that historical and archaeological evidence supports the Hindu side’s claim. The hearing was conducted on a petition filed by the Hindu Front for Justice. ‘Dhar Darbar Elan cannot be treated as final’ Prashant Singh argued that the “Dhar Darbar Elan” or “Dhar Darbar Declaration” cannot be treated as the final authority in the matter. He said the issue had earlier been raised by senior advocates Salman Khurshid, Tausif Warsi and Shobha Menon. According to the Advocate General, the declaration cannot be read in isolation to draw conclusive findings. He told the court that even V. Nadkar, head of the Dhar Darbar, had acknowledged during earlier proceedings that the site was previously a Saraswati temple. He further argued that statements claiming “prayers were offered here, are being offered and will continue to be offered” cannot alone determine the legal nature of the site. Such statements, he said, must be examined in their historical and legal context. ‘Declaration has no legal status’ The state government also argued that the “Dhar Darbar Elan” does not have the status of law. Prashant Singh told the court that the Government of India Act, 1935 came into effect in 1937, and therefore any declaration issued before that period cannot automatically receive statutory recognition under the Act. He argued that for any document to attain the status of law, it must pass through a legislative process. However, the nature of the “Dhar Darbar Declaration” itself remains unclear — whether it was administrative, executive or legislative. Because of this ambiguity, the document cannot be treated as “law” under Article 13 of the Constitution, he submitted. Referring to Section 311(2) of the Government of India Act, 1935, Singh argued that the declaration cannot legally be granted the status of law. Jain side reiterates separate claim During the hearing, advocate Deepak Rajbhar, appearing in the petition filed by Salekchandra Jain, also presented arguments before the court. He reiterated the Jain side’s claim that Bhojshala was earlier a Jain Gurukul and that a temple dedicated to Jain goddess Ambika once existed at the site. Arguments likely to continue The Bhojshala dispute is currently being argued by Hindu, Muslim and Jain parties on the basis of historical documents, archaeological findings and constitutional provisions. The court proceedings are now largely focused on the legal validity of the “Dhar Darbar Elan”, the ASI survey report and historical records connected to the disputed site.