New Delhi, August 24, 2025 – The Supreme Court is all set to take up the heated dispute over the Shahi Jama Masjid and the claimed Harihar Temple in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, tomorrow. This case has been bubbling up for months, mixing history, religion, and law in a way that’s grabbed headlines across India. With tensions still fresh from last year’s violence, many are watching closely to see how the court handles it.
The roots of this conflict go back centuries. The Shahi Jama Masjid, a grand mosque built back in 1526 by Mughal emperor Babur, stands currently in Sambhal. But Hindu groups say it was constructed right on top of an ancient temple dedicated to Lord Vishnu’s Kalki avatar, or sometimes called the Harihar Mandir for Lords Hari (Vishnu) and Har (Shiva). They point to old records suggesting the temple was partly torn down by Babur’s commander, Mir Baqi, to make way for the mosque. An 1879 report from the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) even hints at temple remnants in the area, making the temple case much more strong. The ASI now protects the mosque as a national monument, which adds another layer to the debate.
Fast forward to recent times, and things got intense. Last November, on the 19th, a local court in Chandausi greenlit a survey of the mosque after a petition from Hindu advocates like Hari Shankar Jain and his son Vishnu Shankar Jain. They argued that the site holds deep religious value for Hindus and should be checked for temple ruins. The first survey happened that same day, but a follow-up on November 24 sparked chaos. Protests turned violent, leading to four deaths and many injuries as crowds clashed with police. The Uttar Pradesh government stepped in, imposing curfews and arresting dozens to calm things down.
The mosque’s management committee wasn’t happy. They rushed to the Allahabad High Court, saying the survey order was rushed and didn’t give them a fair shot to argue their side. They leaned on the Places of Worship Act of 1991, which says religious sites should stay as they were on August 15, 1947, no changes allowed. But in May this year, the High Court sided with the lower court, upholding the survey and dismissing the committee’s plea. The judges noted that since it’s an ASI-protected spot, the 1991 law might not fully apply here.
Not stopping there, the committee took it to the Supreme Court with a special leave petition. Back in January, the top court issued notices to the Hindu side, asking for their responses. Things heated up again this week. On August 22, a bench led by Justices P.S. Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar stepped in, ordering everyone to keep things as they are, no changes at the site until further notice. They set the next hearing for August 25, giving the Hindu petitioners time to share more details, including past court rulings on ASI monuments.
Meanwhile, down in the local court, hearings on related matters like possible bans on prayers at the mosque have been pushed to August 28. In July, there was talk of a fresh survey allowed by the High Court, but the Supreme Court’s status quo has put a pause on that for now.
Hindu leaders, like the Jains, say this is about reclaiming heritage. “We’ve got solid history on our side,” Vishnu Shankar Jain has said in past statements, pushing for rights to worship at what they see as a sacred spot. On the other hand, the mosque committee worries that surveys could stir up more trouble and questions the rush without proper hearings. “This is a place of peace for centuries,” one committee member told reporters earlier this year.
This isn’t just a local fight, it’s part of bigger temple-mosque rows popping up in places like Mathura and Varanasi. With the Supreme Court now in the mix, tomorrow’s hearing could set the tone for how these cases play out. Will they allow more digs into the past, or stick to keeping the status quo? Everyone in Sambhal and beyond are holding their breath.
As of now, the site remains quiet under the court’s watch. The bench has asked for records on similar cases, hinting they want a careful look before deciding. Whatever happens, it’s a reminder of how India’s rich history can still spark tough questions today.
