New Delhi: A sense of tension is palpable at Barnawa village in Uttar Pradesh’s Baghpat district after a local court on 5 February delivered its verdict in favour of the Hindu side in a Lakshagriha-Mazar land dispute that dates way back to the 1970s.
Protected by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), the site in dispute has the remains of a dilapidated monument and is located on a mound next to a location where the Hindon and Krishna rivers meet in Barnawa village.
The Hindus believe that the ‘Lakshagriha’ (House of lacquer) — built by Duryodhan to eliminate the Pandavas — from the epic Mahabharat was located in this site. On the other hand, the Muslims claim that it houses the ‘dargah’ (shrine) of a Sufi saint.
A gaushala, a gurukul, an ashram — run by Shree Gandhidham Samiti Lakshagraha — have come up in about 108 bigha land near the so-called ‘Lakshagriha’. Often, young men idle their time as the site is elevated, offering a panoramic view of neighbouring villages. Teenagers play cricket in the empty space.
There is a board at the site announcing the presence of ‘Lakshagrah Gufa’. “To the south of the village, there is this mound about 100 ft high and spread over 30 acres of land, which is considered to be the remains of Lakshagriha. There are two tunnels located under this mound in which the Kauravas had unsuccessfully plotted to kill the Pandavas,” reads the board.
On the day of the court judgement, a large posse of policemen were posted at Barnawa village as the judge set aside the Muslim side’s claims that this used to be a Muslim graveyard and tomb.
But the civil court quashed the claim made by the family of Mukim Khan that the site houses a Muslim graveyard and tomb. The Shree Gandhidham Samiti Lakshagraha is fighting the case from the Hindu side.
In 1960, Krishna Dutt Maharaj, the first defendant in this case, had established the ashram while the Samiti got registered five years later. Later, Khan filed an appeal in the court in 1970 saying that the land was occupied by the Hindus. This case was filed in Meerut court and later transferred to the Baghpat district.
“In its 32-page order, the court found problems with the plaintiff’s claims about the land. The Muslim side said the tomb of the Sufi saint was 600 years old and that after his death, a graveyard grew up that was given to the Waqf by the ‘Shah’, but they couldn’t say who that ruler was. There is no record of the graveyard in government files,” said Ranveer Singh Tomar, the lawyer who represented the Hindu side.
The court also observed that the Muslim side could not establish whether the disputed site was a Waqf property or a graveyard in 1920, Tomar said.
“We submitted all our evidence but it was the court’s decision. We will appeal to a higher court. There was a Mazaar (shrine) and a Kabristan (graveyard); we have all the documents,” said Irshad, who is familiar with this case.
“It is true that we have lost the case but we will certainly go to a higher court,” said Shahid Ali, the lawyer for Muslim side.
“They people used to claim this as a graveyard but the court has released its verdicts in our favour and said this was Lakshagrah as claimed by the Hindus,” Vijaypal, one of the defendants, told ThePrint. “We are happy about the verdict, these people wanted to capture our land but we have clear documents and proofs about our claim.”
After the favourable ruling, the ashram committee plans to open an ayurvedic school among others. Currently, the gurukul has 150 students in its rolls, according to Shree Gandhidham Samiti Lakshagraha head Rajpal Tyagi.
“Now that we have won the case, we can move forward with our plans. We want our students to get Shashtri and Acharya degrees from here, for which we will ask the government for funds,” Tyagi added.
(Edited by Tony Rai)
Also Read: In spotlight over Ram temple event, the Shankaracharyas & their long tryst with politics