Bombay HC stays till Aug 1 Jalgaon collector’s order barring entry to mosque
Hindu outfit Pandavwada Sangharsh Samiti (PSS) claimed that the concerned structure resembles a temple and accused the local Muslim community of encroaching it.
Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court on Tuesday stayed for two weeks a decision of the district administration restraining people from offering prayers at the mosque in Erandol taluka. (File)
Listen to this articleYour browser does not support the audio element.
In an interim relief to the Jumma Masjid Trust Committee that maintains a mosque in Jalgaon, the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court on Tuesday stayed for two weeks (till August 1) a decision of the district administration restraining people from offering prayers at the mosque in Erandol taluka.
The court also directed Jalgaon district collector Aman Mittal to hand over keys to the Trust and said religious prayers can continue till the next date of hearing after two weeks.
You’ve Read Your Free Stories For Now
Sign up and keep reading more stories that matter to you.
The administration issued the impugned interim order on July 11, citing claims and counterclaims over the existence of the mosque, following which the high court issued notice to the respondents.
Hindu outfit Pandavwada Sangharsh Samiti (PSS) claimed that the concerned structure resembles a temple and accused the local Muslim community of encroaching it. The Trust panel maintaining the mosque claimed that it has records to show the existence of the structure at least since 1861.
The single-judge bench of Justice RM Joshi did not accept an objection by respondent authority that the Jumma Masjid Trust Committee could appeal against collector order before an appellate authority and therefore the court should not entertain the petition. The High Court said the petition is maintainable and will be heard after two weeks.
The bench was hearing a plea by the Trust through its president Altaf Khan, seeking to quash and set aside the July 11 order of the collector. Pending hearing of the plea, the petitioner sought a stay on execution and implementation of the same.
On July 13, a division bench of Justices RG Avachat and SA Deshmukh noted that since the order was passed by quasi-judicial authority of District Magistrate under Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), the matter may be heard by a single-judge bench.
Story continues below this ad
On Tuesday, the single-judge bench was told by advocate SS Kazi for the petitioner Trust that the mosque had been in existence for decades and the state government had declared the structure as a historical monument.
Although Hindu groups have been staking claim to the structure since the 1980s, saying that it is associated with the Pandavas who spent years in exile in the area, the latest situation arose from an application or complaint submitted by the Pandavwada Sangharsh Samiti to the District Collector on May 18.
The petitioner claimed that the Collector had issued notice to the Trust pursuant to complaint made by the PSS, directing the trustees to remain present on June 27 for hearing before him.
The plea claimed the trustees appeared before the Collector’s office, however, the hearing did not take place as he was busy. On a later date, the Trust sought time to go through the complaint and file response. The Collector, without giving an opportunity to the petitioner on July 11, passed a restraining order under sections 144 and 145 of CrPC and the same was “arbitrary, illegal and passed in haste”, the plea said.
Story continues below this ad
Public prosecutor (PP) DR Kale, representing the authorities, opposed the plea and argued that the Collector’s order was not a final one, but an interim order and detailed hearing was to take place prior to passing the final order.
The High court stayed implementation and execution of the impugned order. Justice Joshi observed, “Prima facie perusal of the order impugned shows that there is no finding recorded about the Authority being satisfied that there is likelihood of breach of peace on account of alleged dispute… Section 144 of CrPC no doubt provides the powers to the District Magistrate even to take suo motu action, however, existence of likelihood of causing disturbance of public peace or tranquility is sine qua non to assume such power.”
“In prima facie opinion of this court, for want of such findings being recorded makes impugned order vulnerable and not sustainable in law. Having regard to these facts and circumstances, it is fit case to stay the impugned order,” the court added.
On Tuesday, the Jalgaon district collector Aman Mittal held a third hearing with the parties involved, to resolve the dispute. “As per the HC order, From July 19, Section 144 of CrPC has been removed from the area. Since there is no stay on the conducting proceedings related to eviction, we will carry out our proceedings. We have scheduled our next hearing on July 27 when the final order will be passed. We will study the HC order in detail and take an appropriate decision,” Mittal told The Indian Express.
Nayonika Bose is a Senior Correspondent with The Indian Express’ Mumbai bureau. While in the early stages of her career, her focused reporting on local governance and community welfare already demonstrates clear Expertise and Trustworthiness in covering essential civic issues impacting Mumbai's residents.
Expertise & Authority (E-E-A-T)
Specialized Focus: Nayonika's reporting is dedicated to civic and community issues, providing readers with highly relevant, ground-level information about the functionality and administration of India's largest metropolitan area.
Core Coverage Areas: Her articles highlight a strong focus on the fundamental quality of life and public safety in Mumbai, including:
Civic Infrastructure: Reports on critical failures and initiatives related to public works, such as the recurring problem of unauthorized building collapses in Navi Mumbai, the construction of new infrastructure projects (like the Dahisar-Bhayandar Link Road and the Mahalaxmi cable-stayed bridge), and the maintenance of essential city services (e.g., manhole cover theft).
Urban Governance & Crisis Management: Provides detailed coverage of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation's (BMC) response to major crises, particularly during the monsoon (e.g., heavy rainfall, water cuts, and public health concerns like dengue and malaria) and large-scale public safety incidents (e.g., the hoarding collapse fallout).
Community Welfare & Rights: Reports on key social issues, including the financial aid scheme for persons with disabilities, the struggles of Mumbai's hawkers protesting eviction drives, and the dangers faced by workers due to the continuation of manual scavenging in water tanks.
Cultural & Heritage Reporting: Covers significant community stories, including the restoration of British-era fountains and the history of institutions like the 126-year-old Chinchpokli cemetery, showing a breadth of interest beyond pure administration.
Tweets @nayonikakb ... Read More
Omkar Gokhale is a journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Mumbai. His work demonstrates exceptionally strong Expertise and Authority in legal and judicial reporting, making him a highly Trustworthy source for developments concerning the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to Maharashtra and its key institutions.
Expertise & Authority
Affiliation: Reports for The Indian Express, a national newspaper known for its rigorous journalistic standards, lending significant Trustworthiness to his legal coverage.
Core Authority & Specialization: Omkar Gokhale's work is almost exclusively dedicated to the complex field of legal affairs and jurisprudence, specializing in:
Bombay High Court Coverage: He provides detailed, real-time reports on the orders, observations, and decisions of the Bombay High Court's principal and regional benches. Key subjects include:
Fundamental Rights & Environment: Cases on air pollution, the right to life of residents affected by dumping sites, and judicial intervention on critical infrastructure (e.g., Ghodbunder Road potholes).
Civil & Criminal Law: Reporting on significant bail orders (e.g., Elgaar Parishad case), compensation for rail-related deaths, and disputes involving high-profile individuals (e.g., Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty).
Constitutional and Supreme Court Matters: Reports and analysis on key legal principles and Supreme Court warnings concerning Maharashtra, such as those related to local body elections, reservations, and the creamy layer verdict.
Governance and Institution Oversight: Covers court rulings impacting public bodies like the BMC (regularisation of illegal structures) and the State Election Commission (postponement of polls), showcasing a focus on judicial accountability.
Legal Interpretation: Reports on public speeches and observations by prominent judicial figures (e.g., former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai) on topics like free speech, gender equality, and institutional challenges.
Omkar Gokhale's consistent, focused reporting on the judiciary establishes him as a definitive and authoritative voice for legal developments originating from Mumbai and impacting the entire state of Maharashtra. ... Read More
