Lahore's Shaheed Ganj Masjid Issue: Colonial Precedent to Solve Contemporary Historical Contestations
By
Grace Mubashir, New Age Islam
1 June 2024
The
Shaheed Ganj Masjid Issue, Resolved in The Early 20th Century, Can Provide
Valuable Insights and Precedents for Contemporary Title Cases in Kashi
(Varanasi) And Mathura, Which Involve Religious Sites and Historical Claims.
Major
Points:
1.
The Shaheed Ganj Masjid case provides a
significant legal precedent that contemporary courts in India might draw upon
to resolve the complex and sensitive title disputes in Kashi and Mathura
2.
The Gurdwara Shaheed Ganj has a long and
tumultuous history, much like the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh. It
has been a contentious site between Lahore's Sikh and Muslim communities.
3.
Despite petitions in the late 1950s and 1980s
to convert the gurdwara back into a mosque, the Lahore High Court upheld its
earlier decisions.
-------
Masjid
Shaheed Gunj
-----
The
Gurdwara Shaheed Ganj in Lahore is an immaculate white, double-storeyed
building topped with a small dome. A Nishan Sahib (flag) on a pole signifies
that a Khalsa community occupies the precincts. Sikh pilgrims visit this
gurdwara throughout the year, often staying in the rooms facing the shrine.
Daily, the Guru Granth Sahib is recited and then ceremoniously placed in a
special room reserved for the holy scripture, regarded as the living guru.
Activities
at the Gurdwara Shaheed Ganj are typically low key, with only a handful of
people around at any given time. Outside its walls, however, there is a
bustling scene with several ironsmith workshops and a market selling various
second-hand goods in Lahore’s famous Landa Bazaar. The shopkeepers, accustomed
to the presence of the Sikh pilgrims since the shrine’s construction in 2004,
barely notice them as they pass through.
The
Gurdwara Shaheed Ganj has a long and tumultuous history, much like the Babri
Masjid in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh. It has been a contentious site between
Lahore's Sikh and Muslim communities.
Historical
Background
The
gurdwara is located just outside Lahore's walled city in an area called
Nalaukha, believed to have once housed the fabled palace of Prince Dara Shikoh,
who served as governor of Lahore before being assassinated by his brother
Aurangzeb.
Sikhs
believe the site is where hundreds of thousands of their community members were
massacred on the orders of Mir Mannu, the Mughal-appointed governor of Lahore.
Mir Mannu, who came to power in 1764, inherited a strong anti-Sikh sentiment
that had dominated Sikh-Mughal relations since the time of Guru Gobind Singh,
the 10th Sikh guru. Guru Gobind Singh fought several battles against Emperor
Aurangzeb, losing all his sons in the struggle. After his death, Banda Singh
Bahadur continued the fight but was eventually captured and executed. Mani
Singh, the priest of the Harmandir Sahib (Golden Temple), then took up the
political affairs of the community and was eventually executed by Lahore’s
governor Zakarya Khan. Bhai Taru Singh, a disciple of Mani Singh, was also
executed in close proximity to the gurdwara.
Mir Mannu
vowed to exterminate all Sikhs, with traditions noting he was responsible for
the deaths of over 250,000 Sikhs, many at the gurdwara site, then a vacant
space near the historical Abdullah Khan Mosque. Following the ascension of the
Sikhs in Punjab, the entire complex, including the mosque, was granted to the
Sikhs, who built a gurdwara to commemorate the massacres. Sikhs claim Mir Mannu
allowed them to establish a gurdwara after they aided him in the conquest of
Multan, while Muslims assert that the Sikhs forcibly took over the functioning
mosque after coming to power in Lahore.
Legal
Battles and Riots
Under
British colonial rule, the Muslim community sought to reclaim the mosque
through legal channels. A case filed in the Lahore High Court aimed to
reinstate the mosque, but the court ruled it was a gurdwara since no one could
recall offering prayers at the mosque within living memory. Subsequent cases
were similarly dismissed.
In 1935,
the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, responsible for managing
gurdwaras, took control of the site and planned to demolish non-Sikh elements,
including the mosque remains. This led to severe Sikh-Muslim riots in Lahore,
resulting in a city-wide curfew. The British authorities maintained that the
structure would remain a gurdwara.
After
Partition, the gurdwara fell under the control of the Auqaf Department,
responsible for managing abandoned Hindu and Sikh properties in Pakistan.
Despite petitions in the late 1950s and 1980s to convert the gurdwara back into
a mosque, the Lahore High Court upheld its earlier decisions. In the 1990s, as
more Sikh pilgrims visited Pakistan, the expatriate Sikh community in Britain
campaigned for the gurdwara’s renovation. The Pakistani government eventually
permitted the renovation, leading to the gurdwara's reconstruction in 2004.
Despite
initial protests against the renovation, local ironsmiths and shopkeepers
supported the project, recognizing its economic potential, and the objections
gradually faded. The history of the Gurdwara Shaheed Ganj stands out as a
unique instance where the judiciary and the local community came together to
support the preservation of a religious site.
Influence
on Contemporary Cases in Kashi and Mathura
A. Legal Precedent on Possession and Title:
· Continuous Possession: The Shaheed Ganj
Masjid case highlighted the importance of continuous possession in determining
ownership. In Kashi and Mathura, the possession history of the sites will be
crucial. Courts might examine who has had uninterrupted control and for how
long, impacting decisions in favour of the current possessors.
· Legal Limitation Periods: The principle
of legal limitations, as applied in the Shaheed Ganj case, could influence the
court's consideration of whether claims are time-barred. If a significant
period has passed without challenge, the current possessors' title may be
solidified.
B. Impact on Religious Sentiment and Public
Order:
· Managing Communal Tensions: The
resolution of the Shaheed Ganj case, though legally straightforward, involved
managing communal sensitivities. Contemporary courts might look at this case to
find ways to address the communal aspects of the Kashi and Mathura disputes,
potentially favouring solutions that minimize conflict.
· Balancing Historical Claims with Present
Realities: The courts may take a balanced approach that respects historical
claims while considering the current religious and communal dynamics. The
Shaheed Ganj resolution underscored the need to address historical grievances
within the framework of contemporary law and order.
C. Role of Archaeological and Historical
Evidence:
· Evidence-Based Adjudication: In the
Kashi and Mathura cases, historical and archaeological evidence will be
pivotal. The Shaheed Ganj case, though less reliant on such evidence,
demonstrated the importance of concrete proof over oral or undocumented claims.
This precedent might push the courts to favour documented and tangible
evidence.
Legal
Framework and Judicial Philosophy:
· Judicial Restraint and Pragmatism: The
courts in the Shaheed Ganj case demonstrated judicial restraint and a pragmatic
approach to a long-standing religious dispute. Contemporary judges might adopt
a similar philosophy, focusing on legal principles and practical outcomes
rather than getting entangled in historical and theological debates.
The Shaheed
Ganj Masjid in Lahore, originally built as a mosque in the 17th century, was
converted into a gurdwara by the Sikh community. This transition occurred after
significant historical events, including the massacres of Sikhs at the site
under Mir Mannu, the Mughal governor. After the Sikhs rose to power, they
established the site as a gurdwara, which led to prolonged disputes between
Sikhs and Muslims. The British colonial courts eventually ruled in favour of
the Sikhs, emphasizing continuous possession and the principle of legal
limitations due to the passage of time.
In Kashi
and Mathura, the disputes also revolve around historical transitions and claims
of prior religious structures. The Gyanvapi Mosque, adjacent to the Kashi
Vishwanath Temple, is believed by many Hindus to have been built on the site of
a demolished temple. Similarly, the Shahi Idgah Mosque in Mathura is located
near the Krishna Janmabhoomi, which is considered the birthplace of Lord
Krishna. The precedent set by the Shaheed Ganj Masjid case, where continuous
possession and the inability to recall prior usage as a mosque played crucial roles,
might similarly influence the courts in determining the legitimacy of
historical claims and the current usage of these sites.
Legal
Principles and Property Law
The legal
principles that emerged from the Shaheed Ganj Masjid case include the
significance of continuous possession and the impact of legal limitation
periods on property disputes. In the case of Shaheed Ganj, the courts ruled
that the mosque had been under Sikh control for such an extended period that no
living memory could recall it functioning as a mosque. This principle of
adverse possession, where long-term control can result in legal ownership, is
likely to be a critical factor in the Kashi and Mathura cases as well.
For
instance, if the Gyanvapi Mosque has been continuously used as a mosque for
centuries, this long-term possession could be a significant argument in its
favour, despite historical claims of a temple predating it. Similarly, the
Shahi Idgah Mosque's continuous usage as a mosque over the years could
influence the court's decision, potentially making it difficult to revert the
site to its claimed original status as a Hindu temple. The principle of adverse
possession underscores the importance of uninterrupted control and the legal
implications of historical continuity, which could be decisive in these
contemporary disputes.
Managing
Communal Tensions and Public Order
The Shaheed
Ganj Masjid case, which led to significant communal riots in pre-partition
Lahore, highlights the delicate balance courts must maintain between legal rulings
and communal harmony. The resolution of such disputes often requires not only
legal acumen but also sensitivity to the potential for communal unrest. In
contemporary India, where religious sentiments run high, the courts' decisions
in Kashi and Mathura could have far-reaching implications for public order.
Drawing
lessons from the Shaheed Ganj case, Indian courts might adopt a more cautious
and balanced approach, seeking to minimize communal tensions. This could
involve encouraging out-of-court settlements, mediation, or alternative dispute
resolution mechanisms that aim to satisfy both communities to some extent. For
example, a possible solution could involve maintaining the current usage of the
sites while recognizing the historical significance of the claims, thus
preventing further escalation of communal tensions.
Evidence-Based
Adjudication
The Shaheed
Ganj case underscored the importance of concrete evidence over oral traditions
or undocumented claims. The courts relied heavily on documented possession and
the lack of recent memory of the site being used as a mosque. In the Kashi and
Mathura cases, historical and archaeological evidence will play a pivotal role.
The courts are likely to scrutinize tangible evidence, such as historical
records, architectural studies, and archaeological findings, to determine the
legitimacy of the claims.
For the
Gyanvapi Mosque, evidence such as architectural surveys, historical documents,
and records of continuous worship practices will be crucial. Similarly, in Mathura,
evidence supporting the continuous use of the Shahi Idgah Mosque and any
archaeological findings related to the Krishna Janmabhoomi will be vital in
informing the court's decision. By focusing on concrete evidence, the courts
can ensure a fair and objective resolution that stands up to legal scrutiny and
historical accuracy.
In the
contemporary context, Indian courts might adopt a similar philosophy. By
focusing on the present legal status and continuous usage of the disputed
sites, the courts can provide a pragmatic solution that avoids reopening
historical wounds. This approach would involve recognizing the complex history
of the sites while emphasizing current legal realities and public order. Such a
pragmatic stance could help prevent further communal strife and promote a more
harmonious coexistence.
Specific
Cases: Kashi and Mathura
1. Kashi Vishwanath Temple-Gyanvapi Mosque
Dispute:
Historical
Conversion Claims: Claims that the Gyanvapi Mosque was built on the site of a
demolished temple mirror the Shaheed Ganj narrative of religious site
conversion. The courts will likely scrutinize the historical veracity and
continuity of worship practices at the site.
Property
Law Application: The application of property laws, especially regarding adverse
possession and the statute of limitations, will be influenced by the Shaheed
Ganj precedent.
2. Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah
Mosque Dispute:
Historical
Ownership and Control: Similar to the Shaheed Ganj case, the historical
ownership and control over the site will be critical. The courts will assess
the duration and legitimacy of the control exerted by the current managers.
Religious
Rights and Heritage: Balancing religious rights with the preservation of
heritage, as done in the Shaheed Ganj case, will be a guiding factor.
Conclusion
The Shaheed
Ganj Masjid case provides a significant legal precedent that contemporary
courts in India might draw upon to resolve the complex and sensitive title
disputes in Kashi and Mathura. The principles of continuous possession, legal
limitations, and evidence-based adjudication established in the Shaheed Ganj
case are likely to play a crucial role in shaping the judicial approach to
these contemporary issues.
-----
A regular columnist for NewAgeIslam.com, Mubashir
V.P is a PhD scholar in Islamic Studies at Jamia Millia Islamia and freelance
journalist.
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism