AHMEDABAD: The Gujarat High Court has directed the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to examine evidence and seek instructions on a petition claiming that Bharuch's historic Jama Masjid was originally a Jain temple.
The five petitioners have sought recognition of the structure as Ashvabodh Tirth and Shakunika Vihar, protection of an idol of Lord Mallinath reportedly discovered in its basement, and permission for Jain and Hindu worship. The next hearing is scheduled for October 13.
During the hearing, the petitioners challenged the structure's identification as a mosque, arguing that its architecture and references in ancient Jain literature pointed to its origins as a Jain religious site.
They contended that the structure's listing as a mosque in the 1909 Gazette was erroneous from the outset. When the court questioned why the issue had been raised after so many years, the petitioners maintained that their grievance over the site's identification was not new.
A key argument concerns the reported discovery of an idol of Lord Mallinath, the 19th Tirthankara of Jainism, in the building's basement in June 2026. Petitioners' counsel Pratik Bhatia said the idol held immense religious significance for the Jain community and sought immediate measures to protect it. The petitioners also alleged that certain pillars had been targeted for damage.
Citing historical accounts, the petitioners said Bharuch, formerly known as Bhrigukachchha, had a rich religious heritage and that Shakunika Vihar was built by Princess Sudarshana Kumari during King Vijaybahu's reign. They also referred to the writings of Jain Acharya Jainprabhasuri and claimed to possess original texts supporting their case.
The ASI told the court that it was aware of the reported discovery of the idol but said any further action would require an investigation in accordance with the law. Its counsel submitted that the agency's primary responsibility was monument conservation, while decisions on permission for worship fell within the state government's domain.
The state government's counsel said certain submissions warranted investigation, particularly those concerning the idol's preservation and reports of damage to pillars. However, the government did not endorse all the petitioners' claims and stressed the need for caution given the religious sensitivities involved.
The petitioners have sought an ASI inquiry, withdrawal of the site's existing designation as Jama Masjid, restrictions on namaz and permission for Jain and Hindu worship. They also cited the Bhojshala dispute, which is pending before the Supreme Court.
The High Court directed the ASI to examine the material submitted by the petitioners and ensure that a competent official attends the next hearing.
