The Supreme Court on Wednesday observed that it had no reason to doubt that the Madhya Pradesh High Court would consider the objections of the Mosque management, which are stated to be recorded in the videography of the survey conducted by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in the Bhojshala Temple-Kamal Maula Mosque dispute.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi was hearing a petition filed by the Maulana Kamaluddin Welfare Society. The Society had filed an application before the High Court seeking production of the video records and photographs of the ASI survey. The High Court deferred the hearing of the application, saying that it would be considered at the time of the final hearing. Aggrieved by the course adopted by the High Court, the Society approached the Supreme Court.

Senior Advocate Salman Khurshid, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that excavations had taken place at the site contrary to the Supreme Court’s directions passed in April 2024, and the mosque management had raised their objections during the process, which were recorded in the video.

Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, appearing for the Hindu Front for Justice, submitted that the High Court had not taken any decision yet and that the matter is listed for hearing tomorrow. The counsel also submitted that the High Court was acting pursuant to the Supreme Court’s earlier direction for a time-bound decision.

Observing that the High Court would examine the objections, the Chief Justice said, “We will ask HC to watch the videography and take care of whatever objections have been raised.”

Disposing of the petition, the Supreme Court observed in its order that there was no dispute that the survey report had been supplied to the parties and that some of them had already filed objections. The Court noted that the Archaeological Survey of India had also conducted videography of the site during the survey, and that the appellant had raised certain objections during the process, which were recorded in the video.

Taking note of the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s interlocutory order directing that the appellant’s application be considered at the stage of final hearing, the Supreme Court expressed confidence that the High Court would examine the objections of the parties in accordance with the principles of natural justice, including those captured in the videography.

The Court clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and left all issues open.

The Court dictated the order as follows:

“There is no dispute that the survey report was supplied and some of the parties have submitted their objections. It further appears that the ASI also conducted videography of the site, and during the course of the videography, the appellant raised certain objections. The HC has now, in deference to our order, passed the impugned interlocutory order to the effect that the appellant’s application shall be heard at the time of final hearing. According to the appellant, he raised some objections which were recorded in video. We have no doubt that after seeing the video, the High Court will consider the objections of parties in accordance with principles of natural justice, including those found recorded in videography. Nothing is expressed on merits. All issues are left open.”

Case Title: Maulana Kamaluddin Welfare Society Dhar v. Hindu Front for Justice (Regd. Trust No. 976) and Ors.
Case No.: SLP(C) No. 11468/2026