The Delhi High Court will pronounce its order on Friday on a bunch of public interest writ petitions challenging the ‘dastarbandi’ ceremony at Jama Masjid, scheduled for November 22, in which Shahi Imam Ahmed Bukhari’s son is to be anointed the Naib Imam of the Mughal-era mosque.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice G. Rohini and Justice R.S. Endlaw on Thursday heard detailed arguments of the petitioners – Union Government, Delhi Waqf Board and the Archaeological Survey of India – while dealing with the issues of Jama Masjid’s endowment as a Waqf property and the Shahi Imam’s capacity to anoint his son.
The Centre and the Delhi Waqf Board submitted before the Bench that the ceremony planned by Mr. Bukhari had no legal sanctity. Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta suggested that the Shahi Imam could go ahead with the ceremony without any legal implications, at any place other than the 17th Century mosque.
In a related development, a man claiming to be the seventh generation descendant of the last Mughal Emperor, Bahadur Shah Zafar, filed a civil suit in the High Court seeking prohibition on the ‘dastarbandi’ ceremony and a declaration that the office of the Jama Masjid Imam was not hereditary. The suit, filed by Yakub Habeebuddin Tucy, a resident of Hyderabad, is likely to be heard by a different Bench in the High Court on Friday.
The Court asked if the Waqf Board was considering taking any action in the matter and sought the counsel’s response on whether any legal rights would arise after the ‘dastarbandi’ ceremony. “If the Waqf Board is the competent authority, let them inquire and take necessary steps,” observed the Bench.
Waqf Board counsel Wajid Shafiq said the Board had not given any permission to Mr. Bukhari to hold the ceremony and it would not have any legal sanctity without its ratification. The counsel pointed out that though Mr. Bukhari took over as the mosque’s Imam in 2000, his anointment was ratified only in 2006.
Petitioners Suhail Ahmed Khan, Ajay Gautam and V.K. Anand contended that Mr. Bukhari, being an employee of the Waqf Board, could not anoint his son as the Naib Imam. They also said the Shahi Imam was engaged in commercial activities around Jama Masjid in violation of the High Court’s order passed in 2005. The post of Imam could not be hereditary under Islam or the Indian laws, claimed the petitioners.
