Vidisha: National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) member Priyank Kanoongo welcomed the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s verdict declaring the Kamal Maula Mosque, also known as Bhojshala, a temple, and said the judgment has renewed hopes for the revival of the centuries-old Vijay Surya Mandir in Vidisha as well.
The Indore Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court recently redefined the legal status of the Bhojshala complex in Dhar, ruling that the site is a temple and that the Hindu community’s right to worship there had never ceased historically.
In a major ruling delivered on Friday, the division bench of Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla and Justice Alok Awasthi set aside decades of administrative arrangements and compromises surrounding the disputed site.
Reacting to the verdict on Saturday, Kanoongo said the judgment reflects what he described as India’s ongoing “cultural revival” and linked it to other major religious developments in the country.
Speaking to the reporters, Kanoongo said, “We are the people of that fortunate generation who are witnessing the cultural revival of India with their own eyes. We have seen how Prime Minister Narendra Modi ensured that the struggle of 500 years in Ayodhya comes to an end by building a huge Ram Temple.”
He further stated that people across the country are reconnecting with what he termed their historical and cultural legacy.
“People of India are experiencing the glory of their glorious past; all these things are happening. This Bhojshala verdict has also raised hopes that the Goddess Saraswati idol be brought back and we could again start worshipping there,” he said.
The remarks have also brought renewed attention to the long-standing dispute surrounding the Vijay Surya Mandir in Vidisha, a centuries-old structure where members of the Hindu community have traditionally gathered outside locked gates during the festival of Nag Panchami to offer prayers.
In 2024, when permission was sought to enter the premises and conduct rituals inside the structure during the festival, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) stated that the monument was officially registered as the Bijamandal Mosque and not a temple. The ASI cited a gazette notification issued in 1951 to support its position regarding the site’s legal and historical status.
Referring to the Vidisha dispute, Kanoongo said the Bhojshala judgment has strengthened expectations among those seeking recognition of the Vijay Surya Mandir’s historical identity.
“This verdict has also made us optimistic that Vidisha’s Vijay Temple will also achieve this success. I pray to Mahakal that these wishes are fulfilled,” he said.
The issue surrounding the Vidisha structure has continued to generate debate among local representatives and religious groups. Vidisha MLA Mukesh Tondon and several Hindu organisations have been demanding a fresh and detailed archaeological survey of the site.
Those supporting the demand for a new survey argue that a comprehensive archaeological examination is necessary to determine the true historical character of the monument and clarify its original purpose and usage.
The debate has also gained momentum in the backdrop of recent judicial interventions and legal proceedings in several temple-mosque disputes across the country. Following developments in such cases, Hindu organisations have expressed hope that disputed religious sites would undergo renewed legal and historical scrutiny.
The Bhojshala ruling by the Madhya Pradesh High Court is being viewed by several groups as a landmark judgment that could influence future discussions around historically contested religious sites in the country.
(IANS)
