The demolition of Mumbai’s Digambar Jain temple: what happened, how, and why

Civic and court records accessed and evaluated by The Indian Express show that the first notice for demolishing the allegedly illegal structure was issued to the temple trust back in 2005. Since then, the BMC made nine attempts to raze the alleged illegal structure – and finally carried out the action on April 16.

What are the issues around this temple, and the ongoing legal battle?

The structure and alleged illegality

The temple, which is managed by the Shree 1008 Digambar Jain Mandir Trust, has been in existence since 1935, starting out as a makeshift temple on the premises of a bungalow. After the enactment of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (MRTP Act), the temple trust applied for tenancy rights.

According to BMC records, the first notice for demolition was issued in February 2005 under the MRTP Act, on the grounds that the structure stood on a plot reserved for a recreational ground (RG).

In 2012, the trust applied to the civic authorities asking that the structure be legalised as per the MRTP Act. However, the BMC did not agree to do so.

BMC documents show that the KE ward office sought legal opinion from its law department, which advised against demolition in 2013.

“The structure has been verified to be existing before 1962 and cannot be demolished. The liberty granted by the High Court to BMC is only limited to adjudication of the notice under section 53(4) of the MRTP Act for the purpose of regularisation. Thus, the said structure which is authenticated cannot be demolished,” the law department said.

However, between November 2020 and February 2025, the civic authorities made attempts to demolish the structure nine times, issuing prior notice on each occasion.

“Every year, the BMC would issue a notice and the Trust members would move court and get temporary relief,” Prashant Baj, a member of the community, told The Indian Express.

BMC’s argument for demolition

A civic official told The Indian Express, “As per a 1974 Intimation of Disapproval (IOD) letter, the structure had to be demolished. Since the trustees didn’t demolish the structure voluntarily, the first notice for demolishing the structure was issued in 2005. The recipients of the notice didn’t demolish the structure; instead, they expanded the carpet area… Since then the issue has been in court.”

The official said that the April 16 action by BMC came after the Bombay High Court dismissed the Trust’s demand for regularising the structure. “The demolition drive of April 16 was clearly recorded in the court’s Roznama that was submitted on April 15,” the official said.

Battle in courts over the demolition

A city civil court had rejected the temple Trust’s plea against demolition action on April 7, but it gave the Trust interim protection from demolition for seven days to allow it to file an appeal in the High Court.

On April 15, the city civil court rejected an application by the temple Trust seeking extension of interim protection from demolition. The civic body then prepared to go ahead the following day.

The civil court was told on April 15 that due to holidays between April 10 (Mahavir Jayanti) and April 14 (Dr B R Ambedkar’s birth anniversary), the Trust had been unable to file an appeal in the HC.

The BMC opposed the extension application, saying it had been filed to delay the demolition.

On April 16 morning, the Trust informed the HC at an urgent hearing that BMC officials and police were present at the site to begin demolition. The HC ordered a stop to the action, but was informed that most of the structure had already been demolished.

Counsel for BMC submitted to the court that except for two walls measuring 15 feet and 7 feet in length and 10 feet in height, the remaining suit structure had been razed.

The court recorded the statement and directed it to file an affidavit within two weeks along with a copy of the Panchnama report to support its contentions regarding demolition.

“Till next date the status quo in respect of the suit structure as of now shall be maintained,” the HC said, and posted the hearing on appeals to April 30.

Following the demolition

The day after the temple was demolished, members of the Jain community in Mumbai held a silent protest march in Vile Parle. On April 19, at a massive protest rally, Jains were joined by other citizens at the site of the demolished temple.

State Minister Mangal Prabhat Lodha said the BMC should have waited before taking such an action. “The temple was not causing any obstruction, the speed at which BMC took action was entirely unwarranted and officials should have acted carefully considering religious sentiments are involved,” Lodha said.

Varsha Gaikwad, Congress MP from Mumbai’s Dharavi who took part in the protest rally, said the BMC had acted “hastily” and “arbitrarily”. Congress leader Pawan Khera posted on X that “the Jain community is hurt”, and asked “what enmity does BJP have with the tolerance and harmony of the country?”

Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Aaditya Thackeray posted on X: “The BMC is now fully and directly controlled by the Chief Minister’s office and UD minister’s office.”

The members of the community have now demanded that the civic administration should rebuild the demolished portion of the temple. The trustees have approached the state Commission for Minorities.

Curated For You

After Agnipath dashes dreams of becoming IAF Airman, Haryana man passes out of IMA as Army Lieutenant

India vs South Africa 3rd T20I, Live Cricket Score: Bowlers, Abhishek Sharma shine as India beat Proteas by 7 wickets in Dharamshala to take 2-1 series lead

Who are Naveed Akram and Sajid Akram? Alleged father-son shooters in Sydney’s Bondi Beach attack