Fatehpur, Uttar Pradesh: Three large tarpaulin sheets flutter with each passing breeze, exposing the demolished section of the Noori Jama Masjid. Rubble lies scattered on the ground at the site. But the faithfuls come nonetheless at the mosque in the evening, as the clock on the wall shows 4.55 p.m.
While the tarpaulin sheets conceal the extent of demolition and create a semblance of normalcy, the presence of a sizeable number of police and Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) personnel and the helplessness among the local Muslim community are not lost on visitors.
A day after the portion of the mosque lay demolished in Uttar Pradesh’s Lalauli village, the Noori Jama Masjid management committee claims that the torn down section, which is about 150 square meter of land, was used to offer prayers, whereas the Fatehpur district administration reiterates that it was “newly constructed” on government land.
The demolition has cleared approximately 14-15 ft width of the outer hall of the mosque, officials aware of the matter said. But, the committee has claimed that the land on which the mosque stands, has been donated to it and that it is the bhumidhari land.
Bhumidar of a land has the title and exclusive possession over the land
Mohd. Tayyab Noori and Moeen Khan, members of the mosque management committee, maintain that all the structures were ancient. There was no new construction that the administration has claimed to have demolished, they assert.
What has miffed the masjid’s management committee is the alleged high-handed approach behind Tuesday’s demolition action, especially since the case had reached the court.
The masjid’s committee had approached the High Court on 2 December. The first notice under Section 441 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was served to the masjid on 17 August. Another notice was then served on 9 September and a final notice was given by PWD on 4 December. Once a petition was moved in the HC, it was first listed for 6 December but was later scheduled for Friday, mosque management secreatry Noori said.
While the mosque committee and people in Lalauli claimed the petition to be listed for hearing on 13 December, the PWD along with district administration got the bulldozers and the portion of the mosque was demolished on 10 December.
This has become a sore point for the mosque committee.
“The road that the authority is claiming to expand has been in terrible condition for years now. Why couldn’t they wait for a few days? If the Allahabad High Court had declared our mosque illegal, we would have demolished it by ourselves,” Noori, the Jama Masjid management committee secretary, told ThePrint.
On early morning Tuesday, nearly 200 police personnel led by Fatehpur Additional Superintendent of Police, along with five circle officers of the Deputy Superintendent of Police rank, one company of Rapid Action Force (RAF) and three platoons of the PAC were deployed at the site before the bulldozers roared into action.
The Public Works Department (PWD), along with the Fatehpur district administration, assert that the ‘newly constructed section’ of the mosque encroached on the Banda-Bahraich road (state highway 13).
Noori alleged that the committee was not informed of the “sudden” move to carry out the demolition, adding that gadgets such as air conditioners, solar panels installed on the roof were also damaged. “The Quran was disrespected in the process as the portion which was demolished was being used by the people in offering prayers,” he alleged.
Additional District Magistrate (ADM) Avinash Tripathi refuted the claims of Noori, saying that a survey done by PWD and tehsil-level officials found the disputed area falling within 12-m limit from the centre of the road.
As for the allegation of high-handedness and disregard of judicial process, Tripathi said that Tuesday’s action was neither illegal nor contempt of court as there was no order or stay on the demolition.
Tripathi added that the structure that faced action was the only party left to be cleared according to the PWD’s notice.
“What to say now? What impact will it have if the administration did not wait for the court to decide…?” asked Mansoor Khan, who used to run a shop rented in the mosque premises before it was demolished after PWD notice.
Local sources in the PWD said that the demolition was a “routine” exercise which is done on receiving complaints of encroachment or to clear encroachments when any public project is sanctioned.
“There have been at least nine such instances in the last one year. Demolition was carried out thrice in the Bindgi area, while twice it was carried out in the Ghazipur area of the highway,” an official said.
Also Read: A ‘hoax’ bomb threat onboard IndiGo flight & ‘made-up’ stories—inside details of IB officer’s arrest
‘Not govt land, notice legally untenable’
On 17 August, the PWD served notice to 139 properties, including the mosque, asking their owners to either remove unauthorised construction from government land within a week, or face criminal proceedings for criminal trespass.
Almost all owners of such houses and shops, including those rented in the building of the mosque, whose properties fell within the 12 m range from the centre of road, demolished the structures and shifted backwards.
But, the committee, in its written response to the PWD, argued that the masjid predates the existence of the department and that it was built on private land.
“The Noori Jama Masjid has been in existence for more than 185 years, serving as a place of worship for the local Muslim community. It is pertinent to mention that the Masjid has been constructed in a lawful manner on privately owned land, which has been in the possession of the Masjid authorities and has never been a part of any public road or government land,” it said responding to the notice, which ThePrint has seen.
It further elaborated that the mosque built on three biswa of plot was entirely on private land.
“The land on which Noori Jama Masjid stands is privately owned and has been duly recorded in the revenue records since its inception. The Masjid’s existence predates any modern urban planning or road layout, and there has been no encroachment on any public property at any point in time. We have all relevant title documents that establish the legal ownership and existence of the Masjid on private land,” the committee said in its response dated 15 October.
In its petition filed in the High Court through lawyer Syed Azimuddin, a copy of which is with ThePrint, the mosque’s committee argued that they were not served any notice under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
The committee added that Section 21 of the Act mandates that landowners and other interested parties must be provided with prior notice and an opportunity to be heard before their property is acquired—an obligation that was not fulfilled in this case.
Additionally, the petition claimed that no notification for acquisition was published.
It further stated: “No notice was issued under the Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, which governs the development and expansion of urban areas.”
“The arbitrary marking of the mosque premises for demolition, without compliance with statutory provisions, is an affront to the rule of law,” the petition stated.
The committee also highlighted that no notice was sent to the mosque under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, to indicate that the mosque had been “constructed as encroachment”.
The petition also stated that the notice served to the mosque was “legally untenable” as it was issued under Section 441 of the CrPC, which pertains to “criminal trespass.”
It argued that in a matter where the land belongs to the mosque, if the PWD believes it to be government land, “the appropriate remedy lies in civil proceedings, not criminal prosecution.”
The petition further emphasised that possession of the land cannot be disturbed without following due process of law.
It also stated that no opportunity was given to the mosque management committee to contest the allegations.
“The notice is entirely illegal and misconstrued, as the land on which the mosque is situated is clearly bhumidari land and has never, at any point in time, been acquired by the PWD for any purpose,” the petition added.
ADM Tripathi refused to comment on the specific arguments raised by the mosque management committee in the writ petition, citing matter being subjudice but said that all the concerns raised by the management in their responses to the notice were resolved amicably.
Fatehpur Superintendent of Police Dhawal Jaiswal told ThePrint that two notices were sent to the mosque management committee along with hundreds of house owners in August and in September, before a final notice was sent to the panel.
‘We weren’t heard’
Noori alleged that the Fatehpur administration did not wait even for the Allahabad High Court to hear the petition of the mosque management committee.
“This mosque is around 250 years old, built by our forefathers. What’s the encroachment? The road that is being referred to now was built in 1956,” Noori told ThePrint.
“We have given maps, land records, and a response that we have in our writ petition before the high court. Our legal fight is about the issue of encroachment only. The mosque was there before any government. I have land records certifying the presence of a mosque in 1839. Does the PWD have documents to prove encroachment done by the mosque?”
The mosque management committee would have fully complied with any HC judgement, he added.
“Can they build the road and drainage in three days that were for the HC to decide? If these things could not be made in three days, certainly they could have waited three days and let the court decide before unleashing bulldozers.”
But, district officials claim to have analysed the satellite imagery of the location of the mosque for reaching a conclusion on the “new construction”.
“The revenue records establish a 24-metre wide state highway and officials have also studied the satellite-based images that clearly establish that the portion of mosque demolished was new construction,” Fatehpur District Magistrate Ravinder Singh told ThePrint.
‘Took pieces of our hearts’
Since the demolition, not many people are speaking about it. Many feel that their place of worship has been taken away, leaving behind an uncomfortable silence.”
Recalling the significance of the Noori Jama mosque, Imran Khan, 60, said that it was the most precious structure for the Muslims in the neighbourhood, even more than their shops and houses. “It is because of that reason that they did not object to notices for removal of their shops and rather did it all by themselves,” he told ThePrint.
Agreeing with Imran Khan’s emotional connection with the mosque, Naeem Khan, 65, recalled that he has not missed even one day of prayer at the mosque and that the authority’s action on Tuesday was like taking away a piece of his heart.
“All of us complied with the notices served to the shops and houses but this was the most valuable asset of ours and we wanted to protect it. We had also offered the administration exactly the same length of land on the other side of the road to protect the structure of the mosque,” he told ThePrint.
“It was like someone stabbed us and took pieces of our hearts. The entire grief is about the administration not paying respect to our petition in the High Court. If the court would have decided in favour of demolition, we would have removed our own valuables….”
The mosque is the preferred place of worship for Muslims in the Seerganj colony of Lalauli village. Chhedi Khan, 70, said that the mosque was part of their ‘belongings’. “Every groom who used to marry used to first come to the mosque to offer prayers, despite the presence of other smaller mosques in the area. It is our most preferred place of worship,” he said.
Although none of them could pinpoint the year of the reconstruction of the mosque, all of them recalled that the portion damaged in the demolition exercise was built as part of renovation carried out more than 10 years ago.
“First there was a small mosque, but so was the road. As more and more people started coming for prayers, the hall was getting smaller and hence it was renovated with modern day bricks and tiles and extra space was provided accomodated people coming for prayers,” Khan further said.
‘Govt land, taken away by authorities’
Small shops as well as houses line up on either side of the Banda-Bahraich road highway, which runs through this sleepy and neglected village. At a small market alongside this highway, most of the shops are predominantly run by Muslims.
The shop owners confirm that they received the PWD notices about their shops or houses falling in the 12-m range from the centre of the road, all this for widening of the highway.
Ram Sanjeevan, 65, who has been running his grocery shop for more than two decades, confirmed to have received notice. “I had to demolish the front portion of the shop and readjust the shop backwards to comply with the notice,” he told ThePrint.
The grocery shop owner said that he and all others complied with the notice as they were aware that the land belonged to the government.
Mohd. Momin Khan, 30, who runs a shop some 50 m away from the mosque, too, complied with the order for the same reason.
A few metres away from the Noori Jama Masjid live two Valmiki families, who claim to have been allotted the land by gram pradhan to their forefathers.
Munna Valmiki, 35, and his brother Mohan, 30, live with their children in a half-built concrete house. The two families, too, had received a notice of encroachment by the PWD in August following which they had to demolish the frontal portion of their house.
This is an updated version of the report
(Edited by Tony Rai)
Also Read: How a rookie mistake landed 12 in jail after Special 26-style ‘ED raid’ in Gujarat jewellery store
I am amused to see blatantly partisan narrative The Print has written in this story. Why it never writes about atrocities committed in Bangladesh. As a common man it is my observation I wonder why Mosques only pop up overnight anywhere? Will The Print takes up if similar thing happens to temple. And I wonder why problem with Muslims across the world where neither they integrate in countries they migrate nor they live in peace in countries they are majority and are Islamic.
The Print contrary to its claims is yellow journalism at its worst. Anti nation in everything.
Well done Yogi Sarkar!
The mosque management is lying. They have never had any intention of accepting rhe court order. If they had, they would not have approached the Allahabad High Court. Even now, if the HC decision goes aginst their stand, they will approach the Supreme Court.
Indian judiciary being what it is, the case will go on for decades.
Yogi understands their minds well enough. UP police must be appreciated for nipping things in the bud. Kudos!
It’s the same playbook at work everywhere. First, get a small plot of land to build a mosque. Once built, start encroaching slowly and stealthily into neighbouring plots. Even public properties such as roads are encroached upon brazenly. Without permission from relevant authorities, add additional floors to the mosque.
And when some concerned citizen complains, drag the matter in courts. Indian courts ensure that the cases go on forever.
The mosque management committee is lying shamelessly. Even if the Allahabad HC had declared the extensions illegal, they would not have abided by the order. They would have appealed against it in the Supreme Court.
Yogi knows their dirty tricks well enough. Hence, prompt and pre-emptive action.