The Madhya Pradesh High Court has declared the disputed Bhojshala structure in Dhar to be a Hindu temple.
The ruling resolves a long-standing legal battle over the religious character of the site, establishing a precedent for how previous Supreme Court guidelines apply to regional disputes. By designating the site as a temple, the court shifts the legal and administrative control of the structure.
In reaching its decision, the court relied on a specific legal framework. The judgment said, "For determining the character of the disputed area we have to keep in mind… 10 principles laid down [by SC] in the Ayodhya case" [1]. These 10 principles [1] provided the criteria for evaluating the religious identity of the structure based on the Supreme Court's prior ruling in the Ayodhya dispute.
The legal proceedings also addressed historical administrative orders. The Madhya Pradesh government said that a 1935 order [2] issued by the then Dhar princely state regarding the religious nature of the Bhojshala Temple-Kamal Maula Mosque has no legal validity [2]. This challenge to the century-old order removed a significant legal hurdle for the petitioners.
Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, representing the Hindu petitioners, responded to the court's decision with a focus on future use of the site. "We will worship there," Jain said [2].
The court's decision focuses on the application of judicial principles over historical princely decrees. By prioritizing the Supreme Court's Ayodhya framework, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has aligned the Dhar dispute with the broader legal trajectory of religious property claims in India.
“"For determining the character of the disputed area we have to keep in mind… 10 principles laid down [by SC] in the Ayodhya case."”
This ruling demonstrates the continuing influence of the Ayodhya judgment on Indian jurisprudence regarding disputed religious sites. By adopting the Supreme Court's 10-point framework, the Madhya Pradesh High Court is prioritizing a standardized judicial test over historical colonial or princely-state administrative orders, signaling a shift toward a unified legal approach for resolving similar property disputes across the country.
